Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Return to the moon: MALEO, Module Assemby in Low Earth Orbit: A strategy for lunar base build-up
(USC Thesis Other)
Return to the moon: MALEO, Module Assemby in Low Earth Orbit: A strategy for lunar base build-up
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
RETURN TO THE MOON
MALEO : MODULE ASSEMBLY IN LOW EARTH ORBIT
A STRATEGY FOR LUNAR BASE BUILD-UP
by
Madhu Thangavelu
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF BUILDING SCIENCE
December 1989
Copyright 1989 Madhu Thangavelu
UMI Number: EP41419
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Disssitatic n Publ ahjng
UMI EP41419
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProOuesf
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 -1346
U N IV ER S ITY O F S O U T H E R N C A LIF O R N IA
TH E G R A D U A TE S C H O O L
U N IV E R S IT Y PARK
LOS A N G E LE S . C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
J 8f
T3Q7
???ap/yr
This thesis, written by
Madhu Thangavelu
under the direction of h } f. Thesis Committee,
and approved by all its members, has been pre
sented to and accepted by the Dean of The
Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Building Science
Dean
D ate.....
THESIS COMMITTEE
To my father Mahalingam Thangavelu M.D.
and
To my mother Nanoo Saraswathy Thangavelu
both of whom
fostered my imagination
I would like to acknowledge,
Dean Robert S. Harris for his continued financial
and moral support during the evolution of this
p ro je c t, a n d fo r his b ro a d m in d e d
understanding that Architecture does indeed
play a wider role in the Cosmos,
Prof. G. Goetz Schierle, Principal Adviser and
C o m m itte e C hairm an, for his va lu a b le
contribution in the structural developm ent of
MALEO as well as his tremendous patience
during the realization of this project,
Prof. Robert F. Brodsky, co-adviser, for his most
useful and engaging lectures in Spacecraft
Systems Design and for loaning me his equally
informative library of things lunar,
Adjunct Prof. Dimitry Vergun, co-adviser, for
directing the study on a conceptual first order
systems level basis.
Prof. Eberhardt Rechtin who injected fresh
ideas and new energy into the MALEO project,
Prof. Philip Muntz, co-chairman of the school of
Aerospace Engineering and
Prof. Richard K. Miller, Associate Dean,
D epartm ent of Civil Engineering, for their
enthusiasm in helping me to establish a
framework in which to carry out a detailed
engineering design and evaluation study of
MALEO,
Graham E. Dorrington, D e p artm en t of
Engineering, Kings C ollege, University of
Cambridge, for all the assistance in propulsion
system design and partnership in honing the
concept, and,
Peter Diamandis, Todd Hawley and the whole
crew a t the International Space University who
helped me realize this concept.
V
TA B LE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
LIS T OF FIGURES / TABLES vii
PREFACE ix
ABSTRACT xi
INTRODUCTION 1
DEFINITION OF A PHASE 1 LUNAR BASE 2
A BR IEF HISTORY OF LUNAR BASE CONCEPTS 3
TH E HEAVY L IF T LAUNCH VEHICLE 10
THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION
"FREEDOM" 10
MALEO : TH E PHILOSOPHY 12
MALEO : MODULE ASSEMBLY IN LOW EARTH
ORBIT. DEPLOYMENT MODES 14
MALEO : COMPONENTS 17
MALEO : SPACE STATION ASSEMBLY 18
MALEO : MODULE CONFIGURATION 22
MALEO : TR U SS SUPERSTRUCTURE 26
MALEO : LANDING GEAR 28
MALEO : ORBITAL DYNAMICS 30
MALEO : PROPULSION 32
MALEO : POWER 37
MALEO : ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
& LIF E SUPPORT 39
MALEO : PRECURSOR ACTIVITY 43
MALEO : LAUNCH MANIFEST 48
MALEO : LUNAR BASE EVOLUTION 51
MALEO : THE ADVANTAGES / DISADVANTAGES 55
CONCLUSION 59
APPENDIX 1 MALEO CALCULATIONS 61
APPENDIX 2 MALEO : OTHER U S E S 71
APPENDIX 3 THE RAMESES PROJECT 73
BIBLIOGRAPHY 75
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS 81
LIS T OF TABLES / FIGURES
( IN MAP POCKET)
TITLE SHEET 84
MALEO CONCEPTS EVALUATION 85
MALEO PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 86
SPACE STATION FREEDOM AT ASSEMBLY
COMPLETE. (B LO C K -1) 87
MALEO ASSEMBLY AT FREEDOM 88
MALEO MODULE CONFIGURATION
STUDY/TECHNIQUES 89
MALEO AT ASSEMBLY COMPLETE 90
MALEO TRANSLUNAR INJECTION (TLI)
OPTION 1 91
MALEO TLI OPTION 2 92
MALEO LUNAR ORBIT RENDEZVOUS 93
MALEO TOUCHDOWN 94
MALEO DETAILS 95
96
MALEO ORBITAL DYNAMICS
MALEO LAUNCH VEHICLES / MANIFEST
98 MALEO /MALS ACTIVITY COMPARISON
LUNAR BASE DEVELOPMENT IMAGES
1 00
THE RAMESES PROJECT
PREFACE
"The Earth is the cradle of humanity, but one
cannot live in the cradle forever."
- Konstantin Tsiolkovsky
We are a t the threshold of a new era in global
and universal awareness. With the awesom e,
ever expanding horizon of useful inform ation
available to us today, modern te chn o lo gy
continues to open up new doors into
uncharted dimensions which a w a it further
exploration and utilization.
Space exploration and d eve lo p m e n t is
playing a pivotal role in bringing nations
together in w hat might be the first truly global
culture in the history of mankind. With the
aerospace achievem ents of these past few
decades, we have arrived at the juncture of
being able to comprehend, monitor, and utilize
the globe and its resources as never before.
In his never ending quest to unravel the
mysteries o f nature, seeking answers to the
quintessential questions "Who am I?", "Why am I
here?", "Are we alone?", now, for the first time,
man has mastered the technology that will free
him from the planet of his evolution so that he
might seek new worlds in an effort to preserve
and propagate his species. Yes, indeed, the
“Great Diaspora" has just begun.
This project then, is a proposal of how we
could take this first step of leaving the planet
and begin colonizing on another. The project
outlines a strategy to accomplish such a task in
a most econom ic yet safe way.
Naturally then, this project confronts the most
evident and important phenomena of our time;
u n c e rta in ty , c h a n g e and a d a p ta tio n ;
fo rm id a b le c h a n g e a n d in d o m ita b le
adaptation.
ABSTRACT
Module Assembly in Low Earth Orbit (MALEO) is
a strategy for building a Phase 1 Initial
Operational Capability (IOC) lunar habitation
base (LHB-1). An assembly of modules
constituting habitation, laboratory, logistics
and power facilities are integrated at, or in the
v ic in ity o f th e In te rn a tio n a l S pace
Station”Freedom", tested and transported by a
large modular Orbital Transfer Vehicle (mOTV)
to a predetermined lunar parking orbit. A Lunar
Descent and Landing Assembly (LDLA) that is
assembled at or in the vicinity of “Freedom" is
then sent to rendezvous with the MALEO in the
lunar parking orbit. The entire spacecraft /
base is then gently landed on the lunar surface.
The truss superstructure which surrounds the
module assembly is an integral part of the
MALEO strategy and helps to uniform ly
distribute loads encountered during translunar
injection, lunar parking orbit insertion, and
touchdow n. The safely configured base is
operational shortly after landing with minimum
Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) on the lunar
surface.Furthermore, this strategy m ight be
a d a p te d for establishing Initial O perational
Capability (IOC) manned habitation bases in
Lunar Orbit (LOS-1), an outpost on Phobos, and
a Mars Orbital Station (MSS-1). Some major
advantages of the MALEO strategy over
conventional methods of building a lunar base
are pointed out.
MALEOiMODULE ASSEMBLY IN
LOW EARTH ORBIT. A STRATEGY
FOR LUNAR BASE BUILD-UP
INTRODUCTION
A lunar base is the next logical step towards
expanding the human dom ain beyond the
Earth.(9)
A lunar base is an evolutionary p ro je ct
conceived in phases th a t steadily tends to
achieve self sufficiency and eventually exports
resources like lunar oxygen as well as
m anufactured goods back to Low Earth Orbit
and to the Earth. This process will help to further
expand hum an activities beyond cis-lunar
space to encompass the terrestrial planets for
eventual colonization.
Several strategies have been proposed for
lunar base build-up since the last m anned
mission to the moon. Some suggest the use of
robots and Earth based telerobotics before
hum an occup a n cy; and others suggest a
substantial am ount of manned extra vehicular
a ctivity (EVA) before a safe base could
becom e operational.
In most strategies, the com ponents are
launched separately and landed on the lunar
surface, after which they are assembled on the
surface by robots and astronauts in EVA.
Heavy machinery and a substantial amount of
precursor a ctivity is envisaged for site
preparation before landing the components of
the base and eventual human habitation.
The criteria that determine and limit activity in
the harsh environment of the lunar surface are
* Solar Energy Particle Events (Radiation)
* Payload Limitations
* Power Generation Constraints
* Extreme Temperature Variations
* Micro-meteoritic Im pact
* Distance from the Earth
In all the proposed strategies for lunar base
build-up, crew safety must be of the highest
priority. Manned EVA must be reduced to the
bare and essential minimum and used only for
the safest tasks. Robotic and tele-robotic
activity must be maximized.
DEFINITION OF A PHASE 1 LUNAR BASE
A Phase 1 lunar base is the first permanently
manned facility envisaged on the lunar surface.
The mission will provide a test bed for extended
h a b ita tio n , e x p lo ra tio n and s c ie n tific
investigation. It is analogous to a forward base
cam p in the Antarctica or Mt. Everest.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF LUNAR BASE CONCEPTS
Many concepts have been proposed for a
Phase 1 lunar base. These concepts may be
classified into the following.
1. THE PRE-APOLLO CONCEPTS
These concepts, which include the works of such
writers as Jules Verne (whose uncanny
prediction of a launch from Florida in "From the
Earth to the Moon" still continues to amaze us),
as well as “Men in the Moon" by H.G. Wells
offered fascinating insight a b o u t things to
come. In 1949, Chesley Bonestell with Werner
von Braun as technical adviser, depicted the
lunar base with a sense of realism th a t
remained unm atched for years. In 1959 Szilard
proposed a spherical lunar base on legs and
emphasized that the design was influenced by
the local environment. A closed ecologial life
support system was proposed for the crew of
five. A dvanced materials were proposed for
the structure and therm al shielding was
provided by coolants in a double wall shell.
Rigidized shells, underground cylinders, lined
tunnels, and penetrators with explosive charges
have all been proposed. In 1960, the Army Lunar
Construction and Mapping Program proposed
cylinders laid in trenches and then backfilling
the outside with regolith using a multi-purpose
construction vehicle. Concepts in this era have
paid attention to the 1/6 g of the lunar
surface.(30)
2. POST APOLLO / PR E-STS CONCEPTS
The success of the Apollo missions led to the
developm ent of concepts based on the direct
mode of transportation which m eant the direct
Earth-to-Moon transportation and deploym ent
of fully integrated vehicles that served as the
phase 1 lunar base.The concepts were m eant
to succeed the Apollo missions and some of
them are listed below.
The Apollo Logistics Support System (ALSS) was
proposed to be launched a top the mighty
Saturn V B that was successfully employed for
all the Apollo missions. Two astronauts were to
be delivered to the lunar surface along with a
rover. The lunar stay time was to be 14 days. The
fully self sufficient base was m eant to be a
com bination shelter and a laboratory with
about 500 lbs. of equipment. The total payload
weight was estimated at 7000 lbs.(62)
The Lunar Exploration Systems for Apollo (LESA)
was the most ambitious base proposal for the
1960s. The Saturn V LLV booster was to launch
LESA with a payload weight of 25,000 lbs. Three
astronauts were to man the base. The lunar stay
time was to be 90 days. Alternate occupancy
modes were studied.
Both ALSS and LESA are o utdated by the
technological advances m ade since Apollo
but the studies are still valuable for baseline
planning the future lunar programs. (62)
Larger boosters based on the Saturn V design
were planned with payload capabilities up to
46,000 lbs. Six men could stay on the moon for six
months and the lunar rover had a range of 3000
miles. The power requirements were to be
handled by a nuclear therm oelectric pow er
plant with a rating of 10 kilowatts.
A lunar colony was envisaged in 1969 by
Johnson which involved the concept of buried
structures.(62) The concept went on to chart a
com plete developm ent starting with an initial
outpost in 1969 to a scientific station capability
in 1975 and finally a lunar colony by 1978.
Lockheed LMSC co n d u cte d studies which
recom m ended the establishment of several
outposts distributed all over the m oon.Called
program III, the long duration facilities were
scientifically oriented and required 63 Saturn V
launches betw een 1971 and 1988(62).The
proposed MALEO strategy offers a similar
diversifed multi-outpost approach to lunar base
establishment by virtue of landing an entire
base a t the desired location, be it the pole, or
elsewhere.
3. CONCEPTS BASED ON STS/SPACE STATION
In recent years concepts seem to have been
driven by the fa c t th a t the space station
modules and hardware might be adapted for a
lunar base. Such a base m ight be more
econom ical to build provided th a t these
modules could be fitted out appropriately for
lunar conditions and landed safely. The Space
Transportation System (STS) has bee n
unanimously elected to be the prime launch
vehicle thereby determining shape and size of
the launch envelope.
Duke, Mendell and Roberts have discussed
strategies based on this premise. Use of local
material on the lunar surface is meant to reduce
the cost of carrying the entire payload to the
moon. An entire cis-lunar infrastructure has been
worked out and the help of a heavy lift launch
vehicle (HLLV) is suggested. A gradual build-up
of the lunar base is suggested till the lunar
colony becomes self-sufficient.(63)
Hoffman and Niehoff have suggested the use of
nuclear power as the practical alternative to
solar photovoltaics and thoughtfully supplied
the base with more pow er than required
anticipating emergencies as well as evolution.
Again the approach is modular and sequential
and astronaut activity is envisaged only after all
the modules and construction equipment have
been safely landed.(49)
Babb, Davis, Phillips, and Stump have produced
a detailed launch manifest and lunar mission
schedule and have discussed the im pact of
lunar basing on the Space Station.lt is pointed
out that the Space Station will have to serve as
a cryogen d e p o t with a t least a 100 ton
capability and that a heavy lift launch vehicle is
indispensable. In a period of 10 years, 25
modules are delivered to the lunar surface,
approxim ating 465 metric tons of payload.
Again an extensive cis-lunar infrastructure is
envisaged with a fleet of O rbital Transfer
Vehicles (OTV) with LEO-return aerobraking
capability in order to conserve propellants.
After a number of precursor missions, the base is
asssembled on the lunar surface.(52)
Jan Kaplicky and David Nixon have proposed
landing space station - like modules and then
using a regolith shield to protect from radiation.
They point out that burying the module would
make hull inspection difficult and hence go on
to suggest a method of erecting an envelope
over which the regolith is em placed. (56)
Weaver and Laursen have proposed in-situ
construction as soon as a modular base cam p
is e s ta b lis h e d . T e ch n iq u e s fo r soil
em placem ent are investigated and the use of
w ater filled windows in order to block radiation
while still providing a view as well as natural light
is indicated. They point out th a t regolith has
undesirable abrasive and cohesive properties
which have a way of messing up machinery. A
system failure in the Apollo 12 mission is pointed
out due to regolith interference. Dust and dirt
contam ination is therefore an ever present
problem and needs to be seriously considered
in the design of lunar surface machinery and
vehicles.(41) The in-situ construction techniques
discussed seem to be even more appropriate
for a phase 2 expansion scheme and could be
a ideal way to get started in local resources
utilization.
James Burke has presented a strong case for
pursuing a lunar base at the pole. Continuous
access to sunlight and the permanently shaded
regions of the poles offer the possibility for
locating therm odynam ic systems for useful
power generation. The long diurnal cycle of the
moon might thus be overcome at the poles. If
the m uch d e b a te d poldr cold tra p p e d
volatiles are discovered at the poles, then this
region will definitely play an im portant role in
lunar basing.(64)
Edward Teller is dlso a proponent of the polar
base.Besides a dvocating EVA on the lunar
surface over telerobotics he points out th at
locating solar energy conversion devices at the
pole requires less tracking equipm ent and
hence less m aintenance. Application of this
kind of passive technology is very im portant in
the initial stages of lunar base developm ent
when the paucity of m anned presence is
inevitable. EVA should be limited and used for
more critical functions of establishing the
base. (65)
Unless highly reliable robotic and tele-robotic
activity can be demonstrated, it is highly unlikely
that a Phase 1 lunar base might be built that
way. Cast in situ concrete as suggested by Lin
(39) or m agm a and ceram ic structures as
suggested by Khalili (16) seem to be ideal for
robotic building techniques. The lunar base
design proposed by !and(53) also seems to
favor robotic building techniques. In situ rock
m e ltin g discussed by R ow ley a n d
N e u d e cke r(3 9 ) is a u niqu e m e th o d
com parable to Krafft Ehricke's nuclear fusion
detonation underground(61). All of these
methods seem to be very useful during the
advanced phases of lunar colonization.
These concepts mentioned above, represent
the mainstream o f ideas th a t have been
suggested for lunar basing.
In conclusion, all the concepts m entioned
above that might be viable for a phase 1 base
using state-of-the-art te ch n o lo g y em ploy
similar space station-like modules delivered
separately to the lunar surface. A construction
team o f astronauts and robots are then
required to assemble the components at the
end of which operation a safe phase 1 lunar
base will be rendered operational. The prime
driver for this philosophy is probably the logistics
and the capability of the present fleet of
launchers which is inadequate even to support
a small permanently manned lunar base a t this
time. The payload choke point in Low Earth
Orbit has therefore determined the concepts
so far.
The evolving Lunar Base Concepts Evaluation
Table illustration #2 in the m ap pocket, was
useful in the MALEO design synthesis.
THE HEAVY UR LAUNCH VEHICLE (HLLV)
However, the present trend am ong the space
faring nations of the world to build larger and
more pow erful launchers m ight alleviate
payload restrictions, both in mass and volume
parameters. The A dvanced Launch System
(ALS), the Shuttle Derived Launch System (SDLS)
and the Energya are some of the heavy lift
launch vehicles(HLLV) approaching or already
a t operational maturity. These vehicles are
going to be indispensible in order to maintain
even m oderate and uninterrupted perm anent
manned presence in Low Earth Orbit. Present
evaluations show th a t the fleet of space
shuttles might be taxed to the limit in an effort to
m aintain the International Space Station
"Freedom ".(31) A HLLV payload capability of
100 MT (224,000 lbs) or more is essential for
sustained m anned presence and activity in
space and MALEO will require the use of HLLVs
for operational support.
Illustration #14 in the m ap pocket lists the
national as well as the international inventory of
launch vehicles including the HLLVs.
TH E INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FREEDOM
The initiative of the United States to go ahead
with the construction of the International Space
Station "Freedom" makes possible new
strategies for phase 1 lunar base build-up.
W ensley,(l) describes the orbital assembly
techniques being studied a t this time in detail.
The present configuration referred to as the
20/13 configuration is expected to achieve
perm anent mannned capability (PMC) by the
13th launch of the S T S . Assembly com plete (AC)
occurs at the end of the the 20th launch when
the Japanese Experimental Module #2 along
with the logistics spares are finally attached to
the configuration.
The assembly techniques are well known by
now and most of the tools required for assembly
have been extensively tested in orbit in
experiments like EASE and ACCESS where the
astronauts erected structures that are similar to
the space station structural components.
Several unique m echanism s have been
developed for aiding the assembly operations.
The erectable astronaut work platform (AWP),
the mobile transporter (MT) and the astronaut
translation device (ATD) are some of them. The
utility spool is another mechanism that will help
to deploy the fluid and electric lines in an
orderly manner. The space station assembly
requires a combination of EVA and robotics.
Construction begins soon after the mechanisms
are erected. The first truss is assembled and the
solar array a tta ch m e n t follows. Bay 1 is
co m pleted and then the electrical pow er
distribution pallet is added. Next the radiator
panels are connected and deploym ent of the
utility lines is started. The first bay is then moved
vertically, using the mobile transporter, and the
second bay is assembled underneath. The
alpha joint is connected in place to form bay 3
and additional utility connectors are m ated.
Antenna interface adapters are installed, the
assembly is moved vertically once again, and
bay 4 is assembled. The reaction control
m odule is a tta ch e d and more utilities are
installed. At each phase of this sequence, utility
trays carrying pre-assembled wiring harnesses
and fluid lines are deployed from the utilities
spool.(1)
It is from this background of information that the
MALEO strategy for lunar base build-up is
formulated.
The illustration #2 in the m ap pocket shows the
space station Freedom Block 1 at Assembly
Complete (AC).
MALEO: THE PHILOSOPHY
MALEO is the acronym for a strategy as well as
a spacecraft.
MALEO : Modular Assembly in Low Earth Orbit is
the technique or the strategy whereby modular
components are launched from Earth to Orbit
(ETO) and assembled in LEO with or without the
use of the space station Freedom.
MALEO : Module Assembly in Low Earth Orbit is
the entity which is the Initial O perational
C apability (IOC) phase 1 lunar habitation
base.(LHB-l)
MALEO is co n ce iv e d as a strategy to
accelerate the developm ent of a lunar base
program. The pre-fabricated self sustained
large spacecraft philosophy employed during
the initial stages of lunar base development will
enhance astronaut safety during build-up by
circu m ve n tin g the unfam iliar operations
associated with lunar surface assembly activity.
Scientific investigations as well as experimental
m anufacture is facilitated in a quicker time
frame than would be possible if a step by step
sequential build-up is employed. Introduction
of man in the loop at an early stage is desirable,
provided that safety is not compromised and
MALEO offers that advantage by offering a
safely configured lunar base on touchdown.
The MALEO philosophy fits in well with the future
of the United States program , both with the
evolution of the space station as well as the
lunar base program. The space station is
invaluable as a construction facility with all the
tools and e q u ip m e n t and experience
necessary for MALEO integration. The assembly
of MALEO will provide further experience
required to build the m uch larger vehicle
projected for the manned Mars mission.
MALEO is conceived as a nucleating event in
the evolution of a lunar base. It fits in well with
the rich heritage of lunar base studies and but
for the strategy for the phase 1 base build-up,
all of the other studies regarding lunar base
evolution remain valid.
MALEO employs a m odular app ro a ch to
increase the payload capability of the existing
infrastructure. The 50-100 Mg payload delivered
to the lunar surface in the MALEO concept will,
ease th e o p e ra tio n a l a c tiv ity o f the
transportation system by extending the 20-25
Mg payload choke point that is envisaged in
earlier concepts.
MALEO: MODULE ASSEMBLY IN LOW EARTH
ORBIT. DEPLOYMENT MODES
Module Assembly in Low Earth Orbit (MALEO) is
a strategy for building a lunar base. Two
options are possible for the transport and
deployment of the phase 1 lunar base.
1 . DIRECT LEO - MOON TRANSFER (OPTION 1)
2. THE TWO PHASE TRANSFER (OPTION 2)
1. DIRECT LEO - MOON TRANSFER (OPTION 1)
In this option, the Space Transportation System
(STS) will carry the modules, airlock/resource
nodes and the elem ents of the truss
superstructure to LEO where the com ponents
are received at the Space Station "Freedom”.
The m odules are in te g ra te d a n d the
superstructure is erected using the crew from
F reedom to c o m p le te th e MALEO
configuration. The S T S brings up the partially
assembled Lunar Descent and Landing System
(LDLA) next and integration follows. The LDLA is
then docked with the MALEO. The heavy lift
launch vehicles (HLLVs) are then em ployed to
bring up the fuelled modular Orbital Transfer
Vehicles (mOTVs) which are then clustered at
Freedom. The clustered mOTVs dock with
MALEO + LDLA and the entire assembly is thrust
into the desired translunar trajectory. On arrival
at the predetermined lunar altitude, the mOTVs
fire again to circularize the MALEO + LDLA into a
lunar parking orbit. The expended mOTVs are
then jettissoned and the MALEO + LDLA
assembly descend to the lunar surface. The
MALEO phase 1 lunar base is operational shortly
thereafter upon touchdow n with minimum
assembly operations on the lunar surface.
2. THE TWO PHASE TRANSFER (OPTION 2)
PHASE 1
The S pace Transportation System (STS)
launched from the Kennedy Space Center in
Florida will carry the modules, airlock/resource
nodes and the elem ents o f the truss
superstructure into LEO where the components
are received at the Space station “Freedom".
The modules are docked to the main hab/lab
configuration of the Space Station and while
assembly is in progress, the extra space might
be useful for enhancing space station activities.
Three m odules constituting h a b ita tio n ,
laboratory and logistics/power are integrated
by space station crew a t the space station. A /
truss superstructure is added to the assembly. A il.
m odular orbital transfer vehicle (mOTV) is
assembled next. The mOTV is docked with the
MALEO and translunar injection (TU) is effected.
On arrival at the prescribed lunar altitude the
mOTV fires again in order to circularize the
MALEO into a safe lunar parking orbit (LPO). The
expended mOTV is jettisoned and the MALEO
begins lunar orbital operations.. Lunar orbital
activity includes final selection of base site,
u n m a n n e d site p re p a ra tio n a c tiv itie s
supervised from the LPO, and m ight even
involve sample return missions from the lunar
surface to the MALEO in LPO.
PHASE 2
A lander is assembled a t the Space Station. A
propulsion pallet is attached to the lander.The
whole assembly is called the Lunar Descent
and Landing Assembly (LDLA). A mOTV similar
to the one in Phase 1 is assembled, docked with
the (LDLA) and the entire assembly is subjected
to a similar TLI. On arrival at the same LPO, the
expended mOTVs are jettisoned and the
MALEO and the LDLA rendezvous. Soon after
the docking and check-out operation, the
entire lunar base assembly is soft landed on the
lunar surface. Shortly after touchdow n the lunar
base is operational.
The illustrations #8 - 12 in the m ap pocket
d ep ict the translunar injection, the lunar orbit
rendezvous, and the MALEO touchdown on the
lunar surface.
TH E MALEO COMPONENTS
The essential com ponents of the MALEO are as
follows:
1 . Habitation Module 15-17.5 Mg
2. Laboratory Module 15-17.5 Mg
3. Power/Logistics Module 15- 17.5Mg
4. EVA Node 5-7 Mg
5. Expansion Node 5 -7 Mg
6. Optional Node 5-7 Mg
7. Truss Superstructure 6 Mg
8. Landing gear/Airbags 4 Mg
9. Solar Power Panels 3 Mg
10. Lunar Rover X2 2 Mg
11. miscellaneous 10 Mg
Total 100 Mg
It is im portant to note th a t the modules are
configured using the space station as baseline.They
are partially fitted out in order to conserve payload
mass and the racks might be filled eventually as
new astronauts/mission specialists bring along
equipm ent as required.The miscellaneous items
include propellant for attitude control (ACS) as well
as th e h a rd w a re . EVA o p e ra tio n s a n d
com m unications equipm ent are included in this
category.
The illustration #7 in the map pocket shows the
MALEO a t Assembly Complete.
MALEO : SPACE STATION ASSEMBLY
The MALEO lunar base could be assembled in
LEO by the following methods:
1) Assemble MALEO in free space a t LEO
using the S T S alone as the assembly
facility.
2) Assemble MALEO in the vicinity of S S
Freedom, using her crew for assembly
operations.
3) Assemble MALEO at the space station
Freedom, connected to it, and share the
facilities and habitation spaces of the
combined Freedom + MALEO
configuration, till it is time for the MALEO to
depart for the moon.
Certain advantages perceived during the initial
trade-offs between various concepts led the
thesis to evolve around the third technique.
In this third MALEO scenario, the evolution of the
space station "Freedom" is integrally linked with
the deploym ent of the lunar base. The space /
station is truly used as a stepping stone to t h e ^
moon.
Upon com pletion of assembly of the space
station "Freedom", the MALEO Project can
begin. The S T S continues to bring up the MALEO
modules which are docked with the rest of the
space station. While the MALEO lunar base
integration is underway, these modules will offer
more space for the crew of Freedom for
habitation and experimentation.
Two options are possible for MALEO assembly
and integration.
1. Modules are first docked together to form
the desired triangular configuration. The truss
superstructure is then built around the modules.
The tension members are then installed, the
modules are suspended and centered in the
truss and finally the tension members are
pretensioned by astronauts in EVA. During the
entire assembly procedure, the MALEO is
attached to the space station by one airlock
node. A d d itio n a l sca ffo ld in g m ig h t be
necessary in order to stiffen the assembly during
integration.
2. The truss superstructure cradle is first built at
the space station and then the modules are -
inserted into the cradle by winches. Scaffolding,
using the space station as a platform, would
enhance stability during this operation.
Astronauts in EVA will assist in the operation and
once they are securely positioned, centered
and suspended in the truss, the tension
members are pretensioned and the MALEO
assembly is com pleted.
Minimum EVA is expected during MALEO
assembly operations. Most of the assembly of
the modules and the truss superstructure will use
the remote m anipulator system (RMS) of the
space station.
Earth based real time telerobotics is possible
and will be em ployed in the risky task of fuel
handling, when clustering the OTVs needs to be
accom plished.
The use of the "Freedom" space station crew
who are already accom plished in the task of
m odule a tta ch m e n t and truss erection is
e xpected to save considerable tim e and
expense. In the zero gravity environment of LEO,
the inertia of the space station will be ideal to
support for m oving around the m odule
assembly and adding on to the superstructure.
All the equipm ent required for assembling
MALEO would be already available on the
station or attached to it.
The MALEO systems are checked out while still
docked to the space station. Last minute
spares could be effected because of the
com m onality with the space station, thereby
circum venting critical schedule delays.The
cannibalization te chn iq u e is akin to the
suggestion of the Com m ittee on the Space
Station of the National Research Council .(45)
Spares and replacements are the main costs
incurred in an enterprise of this nature and
MALEO offers a clear advantage by being
able to provide spares and replacem ents
quickly and at reduced costs by virtue of the
LEO location and space station proximity.
When the mOTVs are ready to be docked, the
MALEO is disco nn e cted from "Freedom"
floated out, the attitude control systems are
checked out, and a fully remotely operated
docking procedure is feasible. Translunar
injection is effected afterward.
The Lunar Descent and Landing Assembly
(LDLA) is also assembled a t the space station.
On Orbit welding might be necessary. The truss
superstructure is useful because it offers many
points where attachments could be m ade for
equipm ent or instruments. W elding on orbit
might be used if advantages are perceived in
structural strength and integrity th ere b y
affecting payload reduction. If airbags are
used, the lander propulsion configuration might
be different in order to a ccom od a te nozzle
clearance upon touchdown.
These activities dem onstrate the integral
nature of the MALEO strategy with the evolution
of the Space Station.
The illustration #5-6 shows how the MALEO
might be integrated at the Space Station.
MALEO : MODULE CONFIGURATION
The criteria th a t determ ine and limit the
configuration of MALEO are essentially the
evolutionary nature of the preferred design
based on the availability of com ponents
a lre a d y existing in the space program
inventory. Many a time has good architecture
been shelved because the design did not fit in
well with the existing infrastructure. Harwood's
design for the Space Station is one such
e xam ple.(28) Therefore inheritability and
com m onality is of the utmost im portance in
evaluating the feasibility of an architecture.
Substantial cost benefits are expected through
preserving this evolutionary continuity in the
realization of new missions. Payload, mission
re q uire m e nt and evolutio n a ry p o te n tia l
(expansion) are also important determinants.
In this lunar base study, however, the program
determ ined the necessity for three modules in
order to contain the facilities required for a 4
astronaut/mission specialist team. A horizontal
configuration was chosen over a vertical one
because it conform ed well with the space
station requirements and the lunar base did not
impose any major changes to th a t design.
Horizontal modules have larger work spaces
th a t are more congenial for longer term
h a b ita tio n and work. Windows serve an
im p o rta n t psychological function for the
o ccupants by visually linking the exterior
landscape and the interior of the modules. (47)
Double walled windows with water betw een
the walls m ight be used to p ro te ct the
inhabitants from radiation.(41) The horizontal
modules in a triangular configuration was
chosen w ith inherent structural stability
considerations (low center of gravity) in mind as
well as for achieving a three point minimum
touchdow n landing gear th a t might facilitate
rough terrain landing on an unprepared and
unlevelled site w ithout transmitting unwieldy
bending moments to the truss superstructure.
The triangular configuration of modules with
resource/airlock nodes a t each apex also
provides a simple yet effective dual egress
design. The three nodes are also optimum for
incorporating the various environmental control
and life support systems. One node serves as
the sanitation/hygiene node while the other
serves as the air revitalization node. The third
node is the primary entry/exit EVA node. The
hollow tria n g u la r in terio r of the truss
superstructure would provide an ideal docking
facility for the LDLA.
A four module MALEO was studied during the
earlier stages of the lunar base study. The
configuration offered attractive features like
unm odified space station airlock/nodes and
larger habitable volumes. During this study, the
possibility of using the m odule volum e as
propellant tankage during transit/landing was
considered. It m ight prove useful in MALEO
missions during the expansion phase of the
lunar base when the habitation requirements
are not immediate, thus providing ample time
for crew of phase 1 base to clean and rework
the interior before eventual habitation. A t -120
Mg, the four module MALEO was more heavy
and less rigid than the triangular version and the
configuration could cause unwieldy moments
to the superstructure upon landing on uneven
terrain. For all these reasons the four module
MALEO was rejected in favour of the three
module triangular version.
MALEO with modules in several different
configurations are possible and a detailed
study of these structures would help to make a
MALEO to fit a variety of missions depending on
mission duration, number of occupants, and
mission objective. Some alternate MALEO
configurations were studied and they are
summarized in the chart on the following page.
LUNAR BASE CONFIGURATION
PARTIALLY FITTED MODULES
MONO DUAL TRIAD QUADRA
M 20 -30 40 - 55 60 - 75 80 - 100
<
O
I—
E C
L U
>
A A A
AAA
Q
G
©
€
N
D C
O
X
? ?
? ?
A
O
C O
A A A
orzD
AAA
( °)
to)
o ip
MALEO : T R U S S SUPERSTRUCTURE
Space station Freedom m odules are
designed for the zero gravity environment of
Low Earth Orbit. The gravitational forces on the
Freedom structure are negligible and hence
the components only need some ties to keep
them from separating, and the truss structure is
used primarily to support experiments with a
secondary duty of stiffening the entire assembly
On the other hand, MALEO is subjected to g
forces resulting from translunar injection, lunar
orbit insertion, and lunar surface touchdown. x
Preliminary calculations show that the m axim um "
loads th a t MALEO has to be designed for is
about 2gs or approximately 20 m/sec2. These
forces might occur during translunar injection
and possibly during a heavy im p a ct
touchdown.
The m onocoque structure of the modules
designed for the space station habitation and
la boratory facilities are quite strong by
themselves and might be able to withstand the
stresses connected with translunar injection and
lunar surface touchdown but the weak docking
joint assemblies connecting the modules to the
airlock nodes is quite inadequate to be able to
transmit or distribute any appreciable bending
moment. A redesigned joint m ight save the
MALEO from the p ayloa d and assembly
operations associated with building the truss
superstructure. Moreover, from the point of view
of structural safety, it might be undesirable to
stress the monocoque. Uneven stresses acting
on the skin during transit and touchdow n are
difficult to d e te ct and m ight fail eventually
during the active life of the lunar base. Rupture
of the m onocoque can result in very quick
decompression and loss of atmosphere in the
lim ited volum e of the space station-sized
modules. Given the high pumping rate of the
nearly pure vacuum of the lunar environment,
explosive decompression could lead to loss of
lives and is unacceptable. Therefore, the
MALEO co n ce p t favours the use of a truss
superstructure to counter the forces during
transit and touchdow n of the lunar base
assembly. Therefore, the space station
modules and nodes with their weak joints need
no m odification in the MALEO strategy. The
induced g forces are dealt with and uniformly
distributed by the truss superstructure. The truss
superstructure also offers several points of
attachm ent for equipment and instruments that
need not be p ro te cte d from the space
environment.
The truss superstructure essentially consists of
graphite /epoxy com posite tubular elem ent
five meter struts held together by adjustable stiff
tension members. Sixty foot long main members
might be used to form the sides of the triangular
structure. They are four inches in diameter.After
the modules are fully ca g e d by the truss
superstructure, the tension m embers are
adjusted to pretension the truss structure in
order to further stiffen the assembly so th at
structural deflection is minimized, absorbing
induced forces by balanced decrease and
increase in prestress, and the bending moments
incurred during transit and touchdown may be
co u n te re d more efficiently. The landing
gear/airbag system is then a tta ch ed to the
superstructure. Special clam ping and securing
devices are a tta ch e d to the points on the
superstructure w here the LDLA will be
connected upon rendezvous. The total weight
of the superstructure along w ith all the
adjustable tension members and the landing
gear should not exceed 10 Mg.
Some o f th e deta ils re g a rd in g jo in t
c o n n e c tio n s , m odule suspension, and
prestressing ring mechanisms are shown in
illustration #11 in thre map pocket.
LANDING GEAR
Two ideas are considered about the landing
gear for MALEO.
1. MODIFIED LEM LANDING GEAR
Conventional shock absorbers used in the
Lunar Excursion Modules (LEM) m ight be
m o d ifie d for the purpose. C rushable
polystyrene beads in the pistons of such a
landing gedr should absorb the shock upon
landing. In the 1/6 g of the moon the weight of
MALEO is a bout 18-20 Mg. Assuming a level
nominal landing, the forces on eoch set of
shock absorbers should not exceed 6-7 Mg.
Ejecta shields are em ployed to d e fle c t
material that might otherwise im pact on the
pistons rendering them inoperative. Levelling
might be executed by manual or hydraulic
means after touchdown.
2. DEPLOYABLE MULTICELLULAR AIRBAGS
In this concept airbags that are attached to the
underside of the superstructure are deployed
m inutes b e fo re to u c h d o w n . A lth o u g h
controlled gas escape is the idea behind the
concept, experiments need to be done that
will help determine how the ejecta problem
might be countered which might unpredictably
puncture the bags.The multicellular approach
m ight co n ta in rupture e ffe ctive ly. Upon
touchdow n small levellers placed within the
airbag m ight be used to level the whole
assembly. LDLA engine nozzle clearance has to
be studied. The advantage of this concept is
that a very favorable reduction in landing gear
and superstructure weight might be possible if
em ployed and a uniform load distribution
during touchdown is assured.
A hybrid of the tw o concepts m ight also be
employed where the airbags absorb the shock
of the initial im pact and the LEM type gear
subsequently com e in contact with the surface
at a much reduced velocity. The lunar excursion
m odules piloted by the crew o f A pollo
dem onstrated th a t a very soft landing is
possible time and again, and this suggests that
a m anned landing for MALEO m ight be
practical.(8)
MALEO : ORBITAL DYNAMICS
The orbital dynamics of cis-lunar space is well
understood. The successful Apollo missions
have proven th a t safe trajectories can be
employed and that in case of propulsion failure
free return trajectories requiring essentially no
major delta V could be used to get back to
LEO.(38)
There are three basic modes possible for the
typical lunar mission, they are:
1 . DIRECT MODE
In th e direct m ode of transfer, the entire
spacecraft is carried from the Earth, translunar
injection occurs on approaching LEO and
spacecraft completes a partial orbit of the
moon and descents directly to the surface.
There are no staging points and the flight time is
entirely d e p e n d e n t on the energy of the
trajectory.
2. LOW EARTH ORBIT RENDEZVOUS MODE (LEOR)
In LEOR, the spacecraft is launched into a Low
Earth Parking Orbit. Staging occurs at LEO. The
sp a ce ca ft then proceeds on a translunar
trajectory and eventual descent to the lunar
surface.Flight time is dependent on staging
operations and launch w indow opportunities
from LEO.
3. LUNAR ORBIT RENDEZVOUS (LOR)
In LOR, the vehicle is launched, T L I occurs upon
a p p ro a ch in g Low Earth O rbit, and the
spacecraft is then circularized into a parking
orbit (LPO) around the moon. Staging could
occur here. Descent and touchdow n follow.
The Apollo mission employed this technique to
land the astronauts on the moon and return
them to lunar orbit. The lunar excursion module
(LEM) equipped with a descent as well as an
ascent engine operated between LPO and the
lunar surface while the com m and m odule
stayed in the lunar parking orbit. Flight time for
this m ode is also d e p e n d e n t on staging
operations and launch windows that will permit
optimum energy trajectories.
THE MALEO MODE
The MALEO employs a hybrid m ode. The
elements are launched to LEO where they are
assembled a t "Freedom". Delta V for this launch
to LEO is about 9500m/s per launch. Staging
occurs in LEO. As soon as the OTVs are clustered
and docked with the MALEO, the whole
assembly is thrust into a translunar trajectory to
the next staging point which is the lunar parking
orbit. TLI delta V is about 3100 m/s. Delta V for
LPO circularization manuver is about 1000 m/s.
Staging occurs in LPO when the LDLA is docked
with the MALEO. Descent and touch down
occur eventually. LPO to lunar surface requires a
delta V of about 2 lOOm/s with provision for a
hovering manuver before touchdown.(27)
The orbital dynamics illustration #13 in the map
pocket helps to visualize the MALEO strategy.
MALEO : PROPULSION
The MALEO propulsion systems uses
conventional cryogenic chem ical propellants
a n d uses clusters of engines a lre a d y
available.Pratt and Whitney RL-10 engines and
modified space shuttle main engines (SSMEs)
are candidates for MALEO deploym ent. A
m odular approach is used to generate the
thrust levels necessary for translunar injection,
lunar orbit insertion, and eventual lunar descent.
Expendable unmanned vehicles are used for
orbital transfer operations.
Three segments exist in the transportation
network required for MALEO deployment.
1 . Earth - LEO segment
MALEO requires the support of the Space
Shuttle fleet as well as a limited number of HLLV
launchers. The modules are injected to LEO
from the Eastern Test Range a t Kennedy Space
Center. The inclination is 28.5*, the same as the
space station. The unm anned HLLVs are
employed to carry up the fully fuelled Modular
OTVs which are then clustered in LEO a t the
space station. If the fuelling operation is
co n d u cte d a t Freedom, then the tankage
might be plugged in a t the space station prior
to translunar injection. All the components are
docked with the "Freedom" and assembly
operations begin.
2. LEO - LPO Segment
The modular Orbital Transfer Vehicles (mOTVs)
are fully fuelled expendable vehicles designed
to weigh in a t just below the margin of the HLLV
payload capability of 100 Mg to LEO. MALEO
weighing in a t 100 Mg requires three such
mOTVs in a cluster for T LI and the circularization
manuver required for lunar orbit insertion. Since
the Lunar Descent and Landing Assembly
(LDLA) weighs as much as the MALEO, a similar
cluster of mOTVs are used to deliver the LDLA
from LEO to the lunar parking orbit. The mOTVs
use m odified space shuttle main engines
(SSMEs) or modified RL-10 engines clustered in
pods, firing in parallel. Throttleability is the
determining criterion and studies indicate that
SSMEs might be used during T LI (gross injection
mass of 300 Mg and a delta V requirement of
-3100 m/s) and RL-lOs might be employed for
lunar orbit insertion circularization maneuver
(delta V -800-1000 m/s) and touchdown (gross
descent mass is— 200 Mg and delta v -2100 m/s).
Both engines use LOX-LH2 and the thrust levels
are appreciably higher with the SSMEs. The HLLV
shroud envelope will determine the tankage
diameter and hence the mOTV geometry. Boil-
off is the phenomenon by which cryogenic fuel
escapes from the fuel tank due to venting and is
proportional to the time and tem perature a t
which the fuel is maintained. The m olecular
weight of the cryogen is also a determinant.
Boil-off losses for hydrogen are appreciably
higher than for liquid oxygen for this reason.
Therefore delivery of fuel is postponed to the
last missions in order to limit boil-off in LEO with
liquid hydrogen fuel being delivered last. A
Solar Shading Device (SHADE) akin to a Kapton
sail measuring 25 -30 m on a side and weighing
about a 50 kg might be used to limit boil-off
during assembly and transit. Throttleable,
clustered engines are less riskier than single
engine OTV configurations as prem ature
engine cut-off may be compensated by longer
burns with the remaining engines. Autom atic
quick co n n e ct/d isco n n e ct propellant feed
lines are essential for this operation. The mOTVs
used for this purpose are expendable and
jettisoned a t the end of the operation in the
lunar parking orbit.
3. LPO - L S Segment
The Lunar Descent and Landing Assembly
(LDLA) th at is partially assembled and fuelled
on Earth is brought up by the HLLV to LEO.The
LDLA uses a cluster of RL-10 engines. The
engines are gimballed so th a t failure of one
engine might be tolerated and com pensated
for by the other tw o by thrust v e c to r
adjustments. The LDLA is integrated a t the
Space Station. The mOTVs are brought up by
the HLLVs, clustered at Freedom, and the entire
LDLA + mOTV assembly is shipped to LPO. The
mOTVs are jettisoned and the LDLA docks with
the MALEO. O nce the LDLA is securely
attached to the MALEO , the MALEO + LDLA
assembly descends to the lunar surface.
Rocket engine redundancy during all the three
segments of the operation is expected to lower
the risk of the operation considerably. LOX-LH2
cryogenic propulsion systems are em ployed
throughout because they have a reliable history
and the engines are quite standard. Boil-off of
about 1% of Hydrogen is to be expected per
day and so boil-off suppressing additives like
amines may be used if they prove to be cost
effective.(27) If the space station does develop
a cryogenic fuel depot with even a limited
capability, the mOTVs and the LDLA could be
to pp e d off a t the d ep o t before TLI. A Solar
Shading Device (SHADE) akin to a deployable
Kapton Sail might be used to minimize the boil-
off induced by solar heating. At 25 - 30 m on a
side, SHADE would be deployed in the vicinity of
the mOTV during clustering operations and
might even follow the entire MALEO + mOTV
assembly to lunar parking orbit. A similar SHADE
would be used during LDLA assembly and TLI.
SHADE might weigh about 50kg or so and the
tem perature reduction th a t it m ight help
achieve in the mOTV tankage might reduce the
boil-off enough to be advantageous. Recent
advances in tankage insulation technology
promises to retard boil-off by an order of
magnitude and thus the problem might not be
as severe as mentioned above.(32)
Using a 1 : 6 mixture ratio for the oxidizer and the
fuel, a 300 Mg mOTV might require about 250
Mg of liquid hydrogen. Assuming a boil-off of 1%
for each of the three days of transit, not to
mention the time and all the refrigeration and
insulating techniques that might be used at the
space station during the time between HLLV
launches and clustering operations in LEO, the
mOTV will lose fuel a t the rate of a t least 2 -2.5
Mg a day. The 50 kg SHADE might therefore
reduce the ambient temperature of the space
surrounding the assembly and thus save fuel
during assembly and transit.
The thrust structure of the Lunar Descent and
Landing Assembly (LDLA) is m ade as stiff as
necessary with a certain degree of redundancy
to com pensate for unsymmetric loading that
might occur in the event of premature engine
cutoff or singular engine power loss.The thrust
structure is designed so th a t the loads are
conveyed directly to the stiffest mem ber,
axially, at the three nodes of the inner triangular
opening in the truss superstructure of the
MALEO.
MALEO : POWER
Space power systems may be classifed into
three general catagories. They are:
1. Solar Energy Conversion
a) Solar Photovoltaic systems(Solar cells)
b) Solar Dynamic Systems
2. Chemical Energy Conversion
a) Primary cells
b) Regenerative cells(Fuel cells)
3) Nuclear Energy Conversion
a) Thermoelectric systems(RTG)
b) Thermonuclear systems
Phase 1 lunar base studies in the past pointed
to the necessity for a pow er source
independent of the solar photovoltaic systems
usually em ployed reliably in spacecraft. The
slow diurnal lunar period causes 14 Earth days
of lunar night and photovoltaics are rendered
totally inoperative during the long lunar night.
Photovoltaics also require solar tra ckin g
devices which in turn require m aintenance.
Electrical storage systems such as fuel cells,
which must carry the base operations through
this time have turned out to be heavy for even a
m oderate sized phase 1 lunar base. Radio-
isotopeThermoelectric Generators (RTG) th a t
have performed well in the past in umnanned
missions offer the best power to weight ratio to
provide a solar independent power source to
date, with minimum maintenance requirement.
A T O O kilowatt power source is the optimum
suggested for a 4 - 8 man phase 1 lunar base.
The SP - 100 is a candidate nuclear power
source and could be carried in the power and
logistics m odule of the MALEO. M odified
systems capable of delivering many times the
power have been studied and are feasible
using current technology.(21,22,23,24,25) Solar
photovoltaic arrays carried on board provide
the power during lunar orbital operations and
upon to u ch d o w n , the RTG is d e p lo ye d
externally, in EVA. Such a deploym ent using
local regolith or small crater form ations to
provide the necessary radioactive shielding
might be effective to reduce the RTG payload
by essentially eliminating the necessity to carry
along the shielding. If the EVA is considered
hazardous, then the shielding might have to be
carried along.
The lunar rover is supplied by power from
rechargeable cells. A traverse of a hundred
kilometer round trip is possible using m odified
Apollo rovers with better storage batteries.
A dd itio n a l p h o to vo lta ic arrays m ight be
deployed to a c t as lunar rover recharging
d e p o ts (LRRD).The LRRDs consist o f
array/battery clusters which are deployed at
regular intervals as the traverse proceeds
during the lunar day.The batteries thus continue
to charge and can be counted on to extend
the traverse appreciably. Another concept for
the lunar rover is to incorporate a photovoltaic
roof on the lunar rover that might provide shade
for the driver a t the same time as continously
charging the batteries. The GM Sunraycer and
later developm ents should provide useful
information toward the developm ent of such a
vehicle.
Augm ented by the solar arrays and fuel cells
th a t m ight be deployed even for rem ote
operation of equipm ent during the lunar day,
the RTG would be a reliable and effective
power source during phase 1 lunar base build
up, when power demands are not fully defined
and hence erratic. Nuclear power provides the
necessary stability and reserve that is required
for the MALEO phase 1 lunar base build-up.
The figures on the following page illustrate
some of these applications.
MALEO : ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL AND L IF E
SUPPORT SYSTEM (ECLSS)
The ECLSS is responsible for maintaining the life
critical functions on board the spacecraft.
Together with these functions, the ECLSS also
supports other activity th a t enhances the
quality of life of the occupants.
The main functions of the ECLSS are listed below
1) Water reclamation
2) Air Revitalization
3) Temperature and Humidity Control
4) Waste/Trash Management
5) Food
6)Clothing
7) Habitability
8) EVA Suits
Depending on the scale of operations two
kinds of ECLSS are possible. They are
1) Interrupted operation ECLSS
2) City utility ECLSS for advanced bases
For a phase 1 base, interrupted operation
ECLSS is sufficient.
The com ponents of the ECLSS consist of
ta nkage th a t contain w ater, oxygen and
cryogenic nitrogen. Tankage is required to
collect the the waste products as well. Through
an elaborate plumbing network these tanks are
connected to blowers for air revitalization, filters
for air and w ater purification, com paction
devices for waste products, storage and
refrigeration equipment for food and drink and
heat exchangers to conserve energy.
A system that reduces the components of an
otherwise elaborate ECLSS is called the super
critical w ater oxidation system (SCWO). In this
system, waste processing, w ater reclam ation
and contam inant control occur in the same
tankage by subjecting the waste w ater to a
pressure of 250 atmospheres a t 650 C. Such a
system would help reduce the weight of the
ECLSS but might have to be deployed outside
the base.(46)
The candidate ECLSS for phase 1 lunar base
application is derived from the space station
Freedom ECLSS. The habitation volumes and
the occupancy of the MALEO lunar base are
c o m p a tib le w ith th e s p a c e s ta tio n
requirements and the task is simplified by the
fa ct that the 1 /6 g of the lunar surface can help
simplify the design of waste collection and
percolation equipm ent. The system can
a c c o m o d a te grow th and will eventually
support as m any as 8 occupants before
appreciable augm entation is required.(46) The
m anufacture of lunar oxygen will further
allieviate the dem and for imported oxygen and
lunar agriculture on a large scale will enable the
system to operate as a closed ecological life
support system (CELSS).
THE EXTRA VEHICULAR ACTIVITY (EVA) SPACE S U IT
The EVA suit is a miniature version of ECLSS
described above. Besides taking care of all
those functions, the suit needs to protect the
astronaut from the vacuum and radiation of
space. Several layers of fabric are necessary in
order to effectively counter these agents.
The space shuttle space suit, called the extra
vehicular m obility unit (EMU), provides life
support for up to seven hours, by maintaining
oxygen, tem perature control, pressure, food,
w ater, gas rem oval, waste m anagem ent,
cosm ic ray and m eteorite protection. It is
designed to fa cilita te the w earer to do
construction work in space while providing
com m unication and telem etry to the base
about the performance. Weighing about 225
lbs, the outfit can be put on by one person in
five minutes. The space shuttle suit might need
some modification in order to counter lunar soil
adhesion and back tracking but all the other
systems are unmodified. The AX-5 is the latest
addition to the space suit design and is called
a hard suit. Maintenance is said to be minimal
on this suit and it is m eant for space
applications. No information is available about
its perform ance on the lunar surface. The
abrasive nature of the regolith might require
modifications to the AX-5.
A data base for ECLSS is available. LaRC has 17
candidates and the system being developed
for the space station Freedom would be ideal
for use on the Phase 1 lunar base.
43
MALEO MISSION : PRECURSOR ACTIVITY
(OPTIONAL)
The MALEO mission envisages precursor activity
like site selection and preparation before
landing the phase 1 lunar base. The activities
differ from conventional concepts in that, since
module assembly operations occur a t FSS-T, no
major assembly operations are expected on
the lunar surface. The precursor activity is listed
and described in sequence below.
1. S IT E SELECTION
Polar orbiting satellites which are being
considered for surveying the moon will help
determine the region where MALEO might best
serve the function of a phase 1 lunar base. A
satellite e q u ip p e d w ith a gam m a ray
observatory co uld d e te c t cold tra p p e d
volatiles th a t m ight be lo ca te d in the
perm anently shaded poles of the moon. If
w ater is identified a t the poles, as theories
postulate (64), then, augm ented by the fa ct
that the pole offers continous sunlight as well as
perm anent shade for generating power, a
strong case for a polar lunar base exists. Once a
site has been located, preferrably level terrain
with good landing a pp ro a ch visibility, soil
moving and stabilization equipm ent is landed
at the proposed site.
2. EXCAVATION/STABILIZATION PROCEDURE
In the MALEO strategy, this o pe ra tio n is
expected to be remotely controlled from the
Earth, using telerobotics for assistance. The
equipment for the excavation / soil stabilization
p ro ce d u re w ould be a M ulti Purpose
Construction Vehicle (MPCV) derived from
terrestrial vehicles like bulldozers and cranes
used for the purpose. More studies need to be
co nd u cted on the ada p tatio n of terrestrial
earth-m oving, stabilization, and construction
equipment, for lunar construction activity.
Soil stabilization is possible by conventional
tamping using the MPCV. A solar concentrator
akin to a Fresnel lens m ounted on the MPCV
might be effective in order to melt the lunar soil,
thus creating a stable silica surface . Chemical
catalysts could be added to further reduce the
melting tem perature of the regolith. Such a
surface, with all the irregularities caused by
unmelted impurities and minerals that make up
the soil, would have good traction properties
and could be used for operating a lunar rover
or other vehicles. This te chn iq u e o f soil
sta biliza tion w ould be useful fo r the
d eve lo p m e n t of the lunar transportation
network.
The MPCV, operating with an RTG as its prime
power source, would level and stabilize the
landing site for the MALEO, and then proceed
to make a road of a b o u t a kilom eter to
another chosen site, where the operation is
repeated in order to establish the landing /
launching site for the Emergency Rescue
Vehicle.(ERV)
The MPCV then continues to locate landing
aids such as laser beacons and special lighting
that will assist in landing the MALEO as well as
the ERV. The MALEO site preparation is now
com plete, and the MPCV finally prepares a
surface, half way between the MALEO and the
ERV landing site, th a t will be it's storage
location. In it's stable storage location, the
MPCV could also help in directing the landing
approach of the MALEO while being the main
lunar com m unication node for mission control
on Earth till the MALEO arrives.
3. SOLAR STORM SHELTER
The MPCV lander stage is designed to have a
habitable volume that can a cco m o d a te a
crew of up to 8 astronauts for short periods of
time in the event of a solar storm. The MPCV
might be used even before the arrival of MALEO
to em place regolith on this structure, thus
providing radiation protection. The storm
shelter is operational before the MALEO crew
arrive.
4. TH E EMERGENCY RESCUE VEHICLE (ERV)
A direct launch from the lunar surface to LEO is
proposed in the MALEO strategy. The ERV is a
capsule that can accom odate 4-8 crew of the
MALEO phase 1 lunar base for a direct launch to
LEO without docking with other vehicles in lunar
orbit. This is possible because the developm ent
of the LDLA would allow the landing of an ERV
capsule similar to the A pollo com m and
module, on the lunar surface, and still have
enough propellant in the LDLA to launch
directly back to Earth in the case of an
emergency. This kind of a rescue mission could
save the lives of accident victims when time is
the critical factor between life and death and
needs to be studied further.
Upon com pletion of these activities, the site
preparation is co m p le te , the Solar Storm
Shelter and the Emergency Rescue Vehicle are
o p e ra tio n a l, and the MALEO la n d in g
procedures may be undertaken.
If option 1 MALEO deploym ent procedure is
a d o p te d , then the fully assembled MALEO
arrives a t LPO with LDLA a tta c h e d and
necessary landing propellant. The landing aids
are c h e c k e d o u t, a c tiv a te d , d e -o rb it
procedures follow and the MALEO is guided by
the aids to the prepared landing site. Minimum
dust disturbance is expected and this should
provide good visibility for a manned landing, if
a d o p te d .
If option 2 MALEO deploym ent procedure is
adopted, then some of the site selection and
preparation supervision might be done by the
lunar orbital operations crew, if the MALEO is
manned, from lunar orbit.( The 2.77 second time
delay associated with Earth-based telerobotics
could be overcom e by real-tim e rem ote
controlled operation of the MPCV from LPO. If
this feature is included in the MALEO lunar base.
then remote exploratory traverses of the MPCV
might be possible once the MALEO is landed.)
When the LDLA arrives a t the LPO, the crew
might assist with the MALEO +LDLA rendezvous.
Once the whole assembly is securely attached
to each other, de-orbit burn is effected, landing
beacon acquistion follows, and the crew,
assisted by the landing aids, will soft land the
MALEO a t the prepared site.
The MALEO Lunar Habitation Base (LHB-1) is
depected in illustration # 1 2 in the map pocket.
MALEO : LAUNCH MANIFEST
In the MALEO scenario for lunar base build-up
the components that need to be delivered to
"Freedom" in Low Earth Orbit are the following :
SPACE SHUTTLE LAUNCH MANIFEST
1 . Habitation Module + Airlock 25 Mg
2 . Laboratory Module + Airlock 25 Mg
3. Power/Logistics Mod + Airlock 25 Mg
4. Truss Superstructure + ACS + L.G. 10 Mg
5. EVA Equip + Comms +Solar panels 10 Mg
6 . Lunar Rover X 2 + Miscellaneous 5 Mg
T O T A L 100 Mg
HLLV LAUNCH MANIFEST *
7. OTV XI 100 Mg
8 . OTV X I 100 Mg
9. OTV XI 100 Mg
1 0 . Fuelled Lander Assembly 100 Mg
1 1 . OTV X I 100 Mg
1 2 . OTV X I 100 Mg
13. OTV XI 100 Mg
T O T A L 700 Mg
* All units are loaded with propellant.
Alternatively, if the space station has a
tank farm, only empty pressurized tankage
and engines need to be delivered to LEO.
The sp ace shuttle is used to d e live r
com ponents of MALEO while the Heavy Lift
Launch Vehicles (HLLV) are used to deliver the
fuelled Lunar Descent Lander Assembly (LDLA)
as well as the modular Orbital Transfer Vehicles
(mOTV). This technique is adopted because
NASA regulations at this time do not allow the
space shuttle to carry cryogens in its cargo bay.
The HLLV is therefore the prime candidate for
fuel and fuelled vehicle delivery. Fuelling and
cryogen handling a t the space station will
definitely enhance this part of the MALEO
strategy.
From the listing above it is believed th a t four
missions of the space shuttle and seven missions
of the HLLV are required to deliver the
necessary components, propulsion systems and
mOTVs to "Freedom" for further assembly before
eventual MALEO T LI.
The turn - around time betw een launches is
about a month and determines the critcal path
of the MALEO Mission Schedule. Ample launch
windows exist from the "Freedom" orbit to
desirable equatorial lunar orbits. They occur in
the order of every nine days or so.(2) Thus launch
windows may not interfere with the MALEO
mission schedule either. The orbital assembly
of MALEO as well as related space station
activities are of the order of days and hence do
not conflict with the critical path of the mission
schedule. Assuming a launch capability turn
around time for both the HLLV as well as the
space shuttle to be around one launch per
month, these activities should take about seven
to ten months. Once the LDLA and the MALEO
rendezvous, the entire MALEO + LDLA is soft
landed at the predetermined site. Shortly after
touchdown, upon establishing com munication
with mission control on Earth and deploying
solar arrays for power generation, the phase 1
lunar base is operational.
The illustration #14 in the map pocket shows
the MALEO Launch Manifest in the operational
sequence.
MALEO: LUNAR BASE EVOLUTION
Studies on lunar base evolution seem to
resolve problems concerning colonization in
phases. These phases are
PHASE 0 (PRECURSOR PHASE)
Phase 0 begins with the generation of a
masterplan followed by the developm ent of
the hardw are required to accom plish the
mission. Extensive testing is undertaken so that
the reliability of the components are assured.
Precursor missions consisting of satellites and
telerobotic roving vehicles and sample return
missions are useful inorder to locate the site. A
lunar polar orbiter is being considered by
private agencies that m ight help survey the
entire surface of the moon as well as locate any
cold tra p p e d volatiles a t the poles. The
possibility of reassigning operational satellites
for this purpose needs investigation.(67) Then
site preparation follows, using m anned or
unmanned machinery .The laying out of utilities
might also occur in this phase.
PHASE 1 (BASE CAMP PHASE)
In this phase, the essential com ponents
required for habitation and experimentation
are landed. The task of building a storm shelter
is undertaken right away. The em ergency
escape launch pads are also secured without
delay. Construction crew in EVA are then
required to assemble the components of the
base with the aid of robots and m an-tended
equipm ent. Phase 1 is a dem anding stage
where the power requirements are unusually
high and EVA could be constrained by solar
activity. Regolith interference is a concern and
will have to be dealt with.(41) Only after the
com plete assembly of the base with it's dual
egress configuration, will it be safe for
habitation. 4 -8 astronauts are expected to be
on the base by the end of phase 1. MALEO,
having been assembled in the less harsh
radiation environment of LEO, arrives a t the
base site fully assembled, and does away with
much of the activity mentioned above. MALEO
is most effective in this phase since the fully
assembled base is safely configured and much
of the EVA associated with lunar surface
assembly operations is elim inated. In the
MALEO strategy, the Phase 1 base is not
e xp e cte d to provide sufficient radiation
protection as the other concepts have done.
The radiation dosage during the three month
rotation period that is adopted for the crew of
the MALEO phase 1 base is well below the
NASA limit,(54) under normal lunar conditions,
and the solar storm shelter is provided for
additional protection in the event of a solar
particle event. The exposed hull of the MALEO
fa cilita te s easier hull inspection for the
detection of leaks or puncture and rectification
procedures are straight forward. The exposed
modules also make direct view of the exterior
landscape much simpler by the aid of windows
provided in each module.
PHASE 2 (EXPANSION PHASE)
More components consisting of experimental
factories, agricultural facilities, and more
habitation modules are delivered to the base
in this phase. Ten - 15 astronauts are expected
to be on the base by the end of this phase.
Experimental dwellings are deployed and
exploration might reveal geographical features
that might be converted into safe habitats. If
natural habitats are feasible, the base cam p
operations might cease, and in the much safer
radiation environment of the newly found sites,
a lunar colony might develop, with a drastic
reduction in imported habitats. Lava tubes and
unusual crater formations are candidates for
natural habitats.(6 6 ) Experimental im ported
structures include inflatable structures and
expended ta n ka g e from orbital transfer
vehicles. In this phase, the environm ental
control and life support system (ECLSS) will see
some closure. Small amounts of atmosphere
might be manufactured. The MALEO strategy is
n ot a p p lic a b le in phase 2 operations
m entioned above, but it m ight be useful to
locate MALEO outposts on the poles or the
farside or at any other point of interest th at
might have been revealed in further exploration
during phase 2. Therefore, during phase 2, in the
MALEO strategy, additional modules may be
attached to the phase 1 base by landing them
separately, and transporting them to the base
site using the MPCV, and docking them to the
airlock/nodes as done in the conventional
strategies. A simple superstructure is erected to
support the module at the same height as the
MALEO.
PHASE 3 (ADVANCED PHASE)
Phase 3 base is assumed to be self sufficient. A
closed ecological life support system (CELSS) is
in operation by this phase. The occupants
number about a 1 0 0 persons or more and the
colony would engage in the production of
construction material and propellent besides
m aintaining scientific stations and outposts.
More MALEOs might be deployed in this phdse
depending on the dem and for new outposts.
MALEO is a nucleus for further expansion and
evolution. The self sustaining core invites
unregimented growth and it is this feature of
MALEO that is the most attractive.
MALEO : THE ADVANTAGES / DISADVANTAGES
MALEO : TH E ADVANTAGES
Now that one method of achieving a MALEO
lunar base build-up has been discussed, it is
evident that the mission is not only feasible, but
also offers many new attractive features. Some
of these advantages are listed below.
1. Major assembly operations are carried out in
LEO instead of the lunar surface. EVA is an
im p o rta n t a c tiv ity a s s o c ia te d w ith
assembly.(59) Therefore MALEO offers the
following:
a) The much safer radiation environment of
LEO as opposed to the harsh environment
of the lunar surface.(59)
b) MALEO utilizes the experience derived
from the assembly of Space Station
Freedom in a direct manner. This feature
of MALEO enables better task control and
facilitates accurate costing.
c) EVA in LEO is readily learnt and with
practice, execution of tasks in the real
environment is considerably quicker than
exact simulations on the Earth. From the
analysis of the Apollo missions the reverse
is true on the lunar surface and the l / 6 g is
hard to simulate.(8 )
d) Regolith has undesirable abrasive and
cohesive properties which has affected at
least one A po llo mission.(41) Dust
contamination and back tracking into the
base is a serious problem th at has to be
considered while engaging in assembly
operations on the lunar surface .(41) The
clean environm ent of LEO offers very
p re d ic ta b le e q u ip m e n t co ntro l and
m a in te n a n c e w ith no serious
contamination.
e) LEO offers real tim e telerobotics and
hence safe Earth based teleoperation is
feasible. The 2.77 second tim e delay
makes it impossible to teleoperate from
the Earth, with good control, on the moon.
f) EVA and associated lunar surface
equipm ent, te le o p e ra te d cranes and
multifunctional vehicles associated with
co n ve n tio n a l phase 1 lunar base
d e v e lo p m e n t are all su bsta n tially
reduced in the MALEO strategy. These
a ctivitie s are envisaged a fte r the
establishment of the MALEO base.
g) Precursor missions th a t heavily rely on
autom ated equipm ent and vehicles are
an essential p a rt of c o n v e n tio n a l
strategies. MALEO reduces precursor
activity.
h) In the event of a crew assembly accident,
a rescue is probably more feasible from
LEO than from the Moon.
i) Spares and replacem ents are easily
effected in the MALEO strategy during
assembly. Transportation to LEO is quicker
and cheaper than to the moon. Last
minute spares and replacem ents might
be possible by using Freedom hardware
by virtue of com m onality. Thus better
control over mission schedule is possible.
j) The MALEO strategy offers a safely
configured base on touchdown.
Conventional strategies cannot offer a
safe environment for the construction
crew during build-up.
MALEO, during assembly while a tta ch ed to
Freedom, offers further advantages.
a) Provides safe assembly with tools and
equipment available on Freedom. Little
or no EVA is expected during assembly of
MALEO.
b) MALEO offers enhanced facilites for
Freedom operations. More space, more
equipment and more investigations are
possible while MALEO is attached to
Freedom.
c) Freedom offers the 400 Mg inertia
required to handle the MALEO modules
and provides a stable platform for
EVA based as well as robotic activity
using the remote manipulator system
(RMS) as well as the man -tended free
flyer and other Earth based telerobotic
activity.
d) Since the MALEO closely resembles the
space station, the inheritability value of
MALEO is high and could result in
considerable savings in design,
development, testing and engineering.
The developm ent of the LDLA makes possible
the design of an Emergency Rescue Vehicle
that could launch a capsule with the MALEO
crew directly from the lunar surface to the Earth.
This is possible because a modified LDLA could
carry the propellant from the Earth, land on the
lunar surface, and still have enough propellant
for a launch back to the Earth. This system
improves the chance of crew survival in the
event of an accident at the lunar base.
Lunar base build-up involves tight constraints on
power, particularly during the early phases. In
conventional strategies , substantial amounts of
pow er is necessary for construction and
assembly equipm ent. The MALEO strategy
avoids this scenario since the base is fully
assembled on touchdown.
In the MALEO strategy, the base is operational
upon touchdown, implying that early returns on
investment is more possible.
Man as a m anager of autom ated systems has
proved e ffe ctive in the past.(5) MALEO
proposes a m anned mission and includes
manned activity and supervision in the system
loop from the very beginning of the operation.
In doing so, modifications to the strategy are far
more feasible and thus the mission schedule
may be optimized by the man in the loop,
should discrepancies occur.
MALEO : DISADVANTAGES
The propulsion systems employed in the MALEO
stra te g y are large in co m parison to
conventional spacecraft. The thrust levels
associated with the transfer of a 100 Mg MALEO
assembly and the resulting forces on the
structure are quite large and require detailed
investigation. Boil-off could be a serious
problem when dealing with the quantities of
cryogens involved in the MALEO operations.
V ibration control of large structures is
a p p lic a b le to MALEO. Stabilization and
attitude control of a large structure like MALEO
can be quite complex and needs quick and
effective response. The biggest risk of losing the
whole phase 1 base in the event of an accident
during transfer and landing operations is clearly
a disadvantage of the MALEO philosophy.
CONCLUSION
One m ethod of Module Assembly in Low Earth
Orbit has been discussed in this paper. In this first
order systems level study MALEO seems to be
feasible. M ore d e ta ile d tra d e o ffs are
necessary in the area of propulsion and
structures in order to ascertain the benefits of
th e MALEO stra te g y as w e ll as its
disadvantages.
If a decision is m ade for a rapid deploym ent of
a lunar base before the year 2 0 0 0 , using a
m odule assembly approach, MALEO holds
promise and needs d eta ile d engineering
evaluation and systems tradeoff studies along
with the other strategies.
61
APPENDIX 1
MALEO CALCULATIONS
(Rough Calculations . First Order Systems Level)
Problem:
For a 300,000 # MALEO, can available
propulsion systems be successfully employed.
Scenario:
Two scenarios are investigated.
1) 2 Units rendezvous in Lunar Orbit.(LOR)
a) MALEO having jettisoned LEO
engines (2 SSMEs plus tankage) - plus
3 RL -1 0s used for circularization prior
to SSME / Tankage jettison, and then
used for de-orbit and lunar
touchdown.
b) Landing tankage which quick
connects into MALEO and into RL-10
alternate feed lines.
or
2) Direct ascent including landing
propellant and separate tankage. The
SSMEs (X 4) and translunar tankage are
jettisoned once the assembly is in Low
Lunar Orbit (LLO), or alternatively, a direct
descent is made with with RL-10s, with 4
SSMEs and tankage jettisoned after the
Earth perigee burn.
Unmanned landing is adopted for the scenarios
described above.
An autom atically deployable airbag system is
used for the landing gear during the final lunar
surface touchdown. The multi-cellular airbags
d ep lo y during the one m inute hovering
m anuever during w hich final orientation
procedures are also effected. A t LDLA Main
Engines Cut-Off (MECO), the MALEO free falls 5m
(-1 5 ft.) to the lunar surface. The airbags
uniform ly distribute the MALEO load and
controlled gas escape from the airbags slowly
sets the MALEO to its final touchdown location.
SIZING MALEO PROPULSION.
ASSUMPTIONS:
* MALEO mass in LEO is - 140,000 Kg
- 308,000 #
* Lunar Circular Orbit is 150 km.
y2o moon = = 1.7313 x lO^Cft^/sec2)
(3476/2+150)km x (5280/1.6093) ft/km
* v o moon = 5 2 8 7 ft/sec-
Lunar g = 5.31 ft/sec2
32.2/5.31= 6.064
* Tankage + Engines ~ .084 Wp
Materials - carbon composite
wrapped T i Tanks.
* Engine C andidates:
Cryogenic Propellants (LOX / LH 2 )
1) Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME)
2) Pratt 8c Whitney R L-10
Storeable Propellants (N2 O4 /A 5 0 )
AJ 47 Titan IV L/O
AJ 123 Titan IV 2nd
TOUCHDOWN ON TH E MOON.
A. LDLA MAIN ENGINES CUT-OFF.
1. Assume a 10-0 diameter multi-
cellular airbag with blow out patches.
2. Allow 8'-0 for deceleration before
hitting shock absorbers with an 18"
stroke.
3. Assume free fall of 15-0 until airbag
hits lunar surface.
* Prior to MECO, base is a t zero
velocity during hovering/ orientation
manuever.
S = l/2 g t 2 t2 = 2s/g 30/5.31 t~ 3 s e c
v imp=V0 + gt 0 + 5.31x3
-15 ft/sec
So, airbag must reduce -15 ft/sec to zero in 8-0
of travel.
If gas escape is such that this process take 20
seconds ( rate = 8/20 = 0.4 ft/sec).
decceleration of MALEO = AV / At =15/20
= 0.75 ft/sec2
B. Maneuver to hover for one minute prior to
LDLA (MECO).
MALEO weight on lunar surface = 308,000#/6.06
=50.800 #
Thrust required = -60,000 #
Use R L -10 Engines.
Propellant mass = 44.5#/sec x 60 sec. = 2673 #
MALEO w et mass prior to one minute hover
maneuver = 310,672 # (51,232 # lunar)
C. MALEO descent from 150 km lunar orbit to
hovering altitude.
1) Find velocity at 1 km - Hohman transfer
^ o moon = 5287 ft/sec
Rp = 3476/2 + 1 = 1739 km, hp =1 km, hQ =150 km
R a= 3476/2 + 150 = 1880 km.
Semi major axis, a = 3476/2 + 150/2 = 1813.5 km.
V2a = 2 )i /R_ - n / a, Vp = 5620.5 ft/sec
Va = 5198 ft/sec
2) Find propellants to kill 5620.5 ft/sec.
Try 3 RL -10s.
A V = g x Ijp x In M i/M f
or,
M|/Mf = e AV/9 I = l .475
Mj = 1.475 x 310,672 = 458,284 #
Mass of Propellant = 147,612#
Mass fraction .084,
Tankage dry mass = .084 x 147,612 = 12,400 #
At a flow rate of 3 x 44.5 #/sec = 133.5 #/sec.
147,612/133.5= 1106 sec. (excess engine rating
of 240 secs. May need another engine)
(To land on lunar surface) Distance = Or/ 2 x 1880)
= 2966 km.
(Total time to descend) (2966 x 5280) / (1.6093 x
5300) = 1835 secs.
a = 5620.5/1106 = 5ft/sec2
3) AV to de-orbit from 150 km.
5287 - 5198 = 89 ft/sec.
Mi = 458284 + 12,400 = 470,683 #
Mj/Mf = 1.006175 , Mf = 473589
propellant mass = 2906 #
.084x2906 =244#
MALEO mass in LLO (150 km) = 473,833 #
D. CIRCULARIZING AT 150 KM LLO.
LEO at 150 NM orbit
VQ = 7.739 km / sec. = 25,395.8 ft/sec.
earth radius R e = (3444 + 150) nm. = 20926141 ft.
moon distance ha= 240,000 miles = 208,558 nm
a = 3444 +((150 + 208,5580)/2) = 107,798 nm.
VQ = 25,395.8 x 3594/208,558 = 437.6 ft/sec.
Moon's orbital velocity = rc o =
(240,000 x 5280 x 2 x % )/ 30 x 24 x 3600
= 3071.8 ft/sec
So add 3071 + 437 = 3508 ft/ sec.
As a guess. Moon's gravitational pull might add
500 ft / sec givig a fly by velocity of 4000 ft/sec. ~
1300 ft/ sec deficient for circularization into LLO.
A detailed study will be necessary to see if
direct descent to the surface m ight not be
optimum. This would imply adding (473833 -
308000) =165,833 # to translunar propulsion
load.
E . To be conservative, we will round out into
lunar circular orbit using the 3 RL - 10s (which
were integrated in LEO - but use propellant left
over from Earth perigee burn.)
Mi / Mf = e 1300/32.2 x 449 = • ) 0 9 4
Mi = 1.094 x 473,833 = 518,373.3
Propellant mass = 44,540 #
No additional tankage dry mass required.
Mass o f propellant a d d e d to translunar
propellant requirement.
Time of bum = 44,540/3 x 44.5 = 333.6 secs.
a = 1300/333.6 =3.9 ft/sec2
This scenario assumes that a plug in descent
unit, consisting mostly o f ta n ka g e and
propellant, and weighing about 165,833 #, is
flown in separately to lunar circular orbit.
Later we will check to see if it is advantageous
to assemble this load in LEO.
F . MALEO Translunar Injection (TLI).
Mf = 308,000 + 44,540 = 352,540 #
AV = 10,500 ft / sec Use SSM Es.
Mj / Mf = e 10,500/32.2 x 455= 2.0476
Mass of propellant = 369,325 #
Tankage dry mass = .084x369,325 = 31,032#
MALEO TOTAL MASS IN LEO,
If 5 minute burn is permissible,
a = 10,500/ 5 x 60 = 35 ft/sec2
F = ma = (732,888 x 35) / 32.2 = 801,596 # thrust
2 SSMEs will generate this thrust.
If 2.7 minute burn,
a = 10,500/(2.7 x 60) = 1475201 # (3 SSMEs).
Max. gs at end of SSME burn
Wt = 732,880 - 369,325 = 363,555 #
W/ T = 363,555 / 510,000 (one engine shut down)
< 1 g.
G. W hat if lunar round=out, de-orbit, and
landing propellant were added in LEO?
Mass in LEO = 732,880 + 165,833 = 898,713 #
Mj / Mf = 2.0476 as before.
MALEO dry mass
Propellant mass
tankage dry mass
352,540
369,325
31,023
TOTAL 732,888 #
Mass of propellant = 941,491
Tankage dry mass = 79,085
= 1,020,576 #
Total mass at T L I = 1,020,576 + 898,713 = 1,919,289
For 5 minute burn of 4 SSMEs
a = 10,500/(5x60) = 35 ft/sec2
F = (1,919,289 x 35) / 32 ~ 2,000000 #
Time = (941,491)/(4 x 1121) = 210 secs.
H . To truck lunar landing ta n ka g e to
rendezvous in lunar orbit (165,000 #).
A V = 10,500 (fly - by) + 1300 (round -out ) -
11,800# ft/sec.
Try SSME (Isp455)
M| / Mf = e 1 1 >800/(32.2 x 455) = 2.2376
Mass of propellant = 204,205 #
Tankage dry mass = 17,153 #
221,358
165,000
All up 386,358 #
If 1 SSME (90% throttled) - 5 minute burn
a = 10,500/(5 x 60) = 35 ft/ sec2
F = ma = 386,358 x 35/32.2 = 422,580 #
70
Burn time 204,205 /1 121 = 182 secs (~ 3 minutes)
Would also need 1 -2 RL-lOs to circularize.
Answer: It is possible to use existing propulsion
systems to transport and soft land the MALEO
on the lunar surface.
APPENDIX 2
71
MALEO: OTHER U S E S
MALEO is a strategy for building a lunar base.
The strategy is versatile because it can be used
for other applications as well. Some of these
applications are briefly described below.
1. LUNAR LANDER/ PHOBOS OUTPOST
This is the central theme of this paper.
The lunar lander might also serve as a lander for
instance on Phobos as an outpost or could
serve as a manned exploratory vehicle for
asteroid missions.
2. LUNAR ORBITAL STATION / MARS ORBITAL
STATION (MSS-1)
The same m odule assem bly strategy is
adopted. As soon as the OTVs are jettisoned in
the desired lunar orbit, operations begin. The
lunar orbiting station could be configured to be
a depot with a variety of functions.
3. MANNED MARS MISSION VEHICLE
A manned Mars mission will benefit from studies
co n d u cte d on MALEO. Again a variety of
configurations are possible and using tethers it
will be possible to induce artificial gravity on a
MALEO so th a t long duration flights m ay be
undertaken.
4. MAN TENDED F R E E F LY E R
M any o n g o in g studies ind icate the need for
such a vehicle augm enting the space station
for re trie vin g rem ote o b je cts in. space. A
MALEO m ig h t be used for longer duration
missions to the geostationary orbit or beyond to
retrieve o b je cts and possibly service them
w ith o u t ever having to d e o rb it them . Large
geostationary platforms are envisaged for the
future o f telecom m unications a nd MALEOs
m ig h t s e rv ic e these la rg e fa c ilitie s in
geostationary orbit.
MAN TENDED FREE FLYER
LUNAR ORBITING STATION
MARS SPACE STATION
LUNAR LANDER
PHOBOS OUTPOST
APPENDIX 3
RAMESES is an acronym fo r:
Reusable, Adaptable, Multi-Environmental,
Shippable, Exploratory Structure.
The RAMESES project is the outcom e of a multi
discip lin a ry study in A rc h ite c tu re and
A erospace Engineering. The research and
project focussed on the Transfer of Aerospace
Technology for Terrestrial Building Systems. The
thesis involved a feasibility study and the design
synthesis o f alternate concepts for a mobile
facility for Exploration and Earth Resources
Location. The key considerations that directed
the project were com pact packaging, ease of
deploym ent, and recoverability. Aerospace
technology offers ideal materials and methods
for the fabrication of such a system. Composite
materials, having high strength and low weight,
very good thermal insulation along with highly
effective and reliable Closed and partially
open Environmental Control Systems (CELSS),
are candidates for the RAMESES project.
C o m m unication systems and d a ta links
em ployed in the guidance and navigation
control (GNC) of spacecraft as well as for
station keeping and critical life functions
maintenance and monitoring are incorporated
in the RAMESES project. These systems are
m e a n t to re d u ce the stress on the
scientist/explorer o ccu p a n ts, w ho w ould
benefit by being able to spend more time with
74
their experiments. Such systems would also help
to improve the productivity of the explorers, by
providing higher quality of life (QOL), leisure and
re c re a tio n , by e n h a n c in g re a l-tim e
communication and interaction with the mission
control personnel. Systems em ployed in the
RAMESES project are subject to the harsh
environmental conditions in remote parts of the
globe such as the Antarctica, the Sahara, and
the Amazon rain forests. Existing facilities and
experience in these areas helped to develop
the program on which the RAMESES project is
based.
Reconnaissance and Exploratory Missions which
eventually colonize, form the backdrop of this
project and such a study is useful in developing
the baseline planning for the manned lunar and
planetary missions projected for the near future.
It is in projects like RAMESES, here on Earth, I
believe, that we will find an opportunity to test
and a d a p t to conditions and emergencies that
m ight arise while exploring the Solar System,
and thus be prepared to face the reality of such
missions which await us even before the turn of
the century.
Illustration #17 in the map pocket shows some
of the concepts that evolved from the RAMESES
Project.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 . W ensley, D avid B . U.S. Space Station "Freedom". i
O rbital Assembly and Early Mission O pportunities. i
IAFC 1988 j
J
2. W o o d c o c k , G ordon R . Logistic Support for Lunar
Bases. IAFC86
3. W o o d c o c k , G ordon R.Transportation Networks for
Lunar Resources Utilization. Boeing A erospace
C orp.
4. W o o d c o c k , G ordon R. Basing O ptions for Lunar I
O xygen for M anned Mars Mission. Boeing j
A e ro s p a ce C orporation. j
5 Loftus , Joseph P. Man's Role in S pace Exploration j
a n d Exploitation. The.British Interplanetary Society I
1986 |
!
6. Loftus, Joseph P. The Elements o f a S pace i
O perations System . IAF 82
7. Loftus, Joseph P. An Historical O verview of NASA
M an ne d S p a ce cra ft a n d their C rew Stations . British
Interplanetary Society Vol. 38 1985
8. Loftus, Joseph P. & Rollin M. Patton. Astronaut
A ctivity.
9. N ational Commission On Space . Pioneering the
S pace Frontier. Bantam 1986.
10. Mikuias, M. In - Space C onstruction o f Large Space
Structures . NASA Langley Research C enter. ISU
Lectures July 1988.
11. Stahle, Robert L . Earth Orbital Facilities to Support
Mars Expedition . Notes 26-27, World Space
Foundation. 1987.
12. Koehlle, Herman H. The Case for an International
Lunar Base. IAA Proposal , Sept '87.
13. Griffin, Brand. Systems Engineering: An Overview.
Boeing Aerospace Corp. International Space
University (ISU)Lecture July 1988 I
14. Crawley, Edward. Systems Analysis and Costing. ISU |
Lecture MIT. July 1988 I
i
i
15. Crawley, Edward. Space Structure Design. ISU j
Lecture, MIT.
16. Khalili, E . N a d ir. Regolith and Local Resources to |
G enerate Lunar Structures and Shielding. j
I
17. Mendell, Wendell W. Is the Moon Necessary? JSC, j
NASA. !
!
18. Duke, Mendell, Roberts. Toward a Lunar Base j
Program. Space Policy Feb 1985.
I
19. Duke 8c Mendell. Scientific Investigations a t a Lunar |
Base. Space Technology Vol. 00 No.O I
20. M e n d e ll, W.W. 8c Kessler, D. J. Limits to Growth in Low
Earth Orbit. IAA 87-574 IAFC 1987.
21. Fordyce, J. S tuart. Space Power. LaRC NASA. IS U
Lecture, 20 July 1988.
22. Faymon, Carl A. 8 c Fordyce, J. Stuart. Space Power j
Technology into the 21 Century. NASA.Lewis |
Research Center. j
23. Fordyce, J. S . 8c Schwartz, H. Potential Im pact of I
New Power System Technology on the Design of
M anned Spacecraft.
77
24. Bloomfield, Harvey. Technical Status of Brayton ,
Rankine, and Stirling Space Power Systems. Power
Tech. Div. LaRC NASA.
25. Mason, Lee S . SP-100 Power Systems. Conceptual
Design for Lunar Base Application.
26. Layton, J. Preston . Propulsion Options for Orbital
Transfers in Cis-Lunar Space. Space Manufacturing
Facilities. AIAA 1977
27. Tischler, Adelbert O. Near Term Chemically Propelled
Space Transportation Systems. SMF Princeton
Conference. AIAA 1977
28. Harwood, O.P. An Evolutionary Space Station
Architecture. The British Planetary Society . Vol. 38
1985.
29. Cohen, Marc M. Light Weight Structures in Space
Station Configurations. NASA Ames Research
Center. Unisearch Ltd. 1986. Revision 1987.
30. Johnson, Stewart W, & Leonard, Ray S . Evolution of
Concepts for Lunar Bases. Lunar Bases Conference
1985.
31. NASA. Exploration Studies Technical Report. FY 1988
Status. Office of Exploration. Volume I. Technical
Summary.Technical Memorandum 4075.
32. NASA. Exploration Studies Technical Report. FY 1988
Status. Office of Exploration. Study Approach and
Results.Volume II. Technical Memorandum 4075.
33. Puttkamer, Jesco Von. Developing Space
O ccupancy Perspectives On NASA Future Space
Program Planning. NASA Hq. SMF Princeton
Conference 1977.
34. Rechtin, Eberhardt. The Solar Wind and Beyond.
Theodore Von Karman Lecture. AIAA 85-0250 1985.
78
35. Nock, Kerry T . Lunar Prospecting . JPL IS U Lecture
July 1988.
36. Dannenberg, Konrad K . A Primer On Rocket
Propulsion.
37. Pouliquen, Marcel. IS U Lectures on Propulsion. SEP
July 1988.
38. Hughes, P.O. Orbital Dynamics. IS U Lectures July
1988.
39. Mendell, W.W. Lunar Bases and A ctivities for the 21st
Century. Editor. LPI1985.
40. Heppenheimer, T.A. Colonies in Space. Stackpole
Books, 1977.
41. W eaver, Leon B .8c Laursen, Eric F . Techniques for the
Utilization of Extraterrestrial Resources IAFC 1988.
42. Space Environment in Low Earth Orbit. IS U Notes
1988.
43. Taylor, Jeffrey. Space Environment on the Moon.
University of New Mexico.
44. Brown, William C. Microwave Energy Transmission.
SMF 1977.
45. Report of the Committee on the Space Station of
the National Research Council. National Academ y
Press 1987.
46. Hypes, Warren D,&Hall, John B . ECLS Systems for a
Lunar Base - A Baseline and some Alternate
Concepts. SAE 881058.
47. Nixon, David. Space Station Group Activities
Habitability Module Studies. NASA NCC2-356.
79
48. Space Station /Antarctic Analogs NASA NAG2-255
NAGW-659.
49. Hoffman, Stephen J,8cNeihoff,John C. Preliminary
Design Of A Permanently Manned Lunar Surface
Research Base. Lunar Bases W.W. Mendell Ed. LPI
1985.
51. W oodcock, Gordon R . Mission and Operations
Modes for Lunar Basing. Boeing Aerospace Corp.
52. Babb, Davis, Phillips,&Stump. Impact of Lunar and
Planetary Missions on the Space Station. Eagle
Engineering. LPI 1985.
53. Land, Peter. Lunar Base Design IIT School of
Architecture.
54. Natchwey, Stuart. Radiation Protection IS U Lecture
NASA. July 1988.
55. Bevilaqua,Franco. Tethers in Space. Aeritalia. IS U
July 1988.
56. Kaplicky, Jan & Nixon, David. A Surface Assembled
Superstructure Envelope System to Support Regolith
Mass Shielding for an IOC Lunar Base. LP I 1985.
57. Cordell B . et al. Implications of the NASA Lunar
Initiative for a Typical Space Transportation
Architecture LBS - 88 -160 Symposium on Lunar
Bases. 1988.
58. Duke M.B. & Aldred J.W. A Lunar Base Scenario
Emphasising Early Self Sufficiency. LB S - 88 - 241. 1988.
59. Bufkin A.L. et al. EVA Concerns for a Future Lunar Base
. LB S -88-214 Symposium on Lunar Bases. 1988.
60. Iwata, T . Unmanned Surface Development for
Manned Surface Activities. LB S -88 -7232. 1988.
8 0
61. Ehricke, Krafft A. Lunar Industrialization and
Settlement: Birth of a Polyglobal Civilization Lunar
Bases and Activities of the 21st Century. Ed W.W.
Mendell. LPI 1985.
62. Lowman Jr., Paul D. Lunar Bases: A Post Apollo
Evaluation. Lunar Bases and Activities of the 21st
Century. Ed. W.W. Mendell.
63. Duke, Wendell, Roberts.Strategies for a Permanent
Lunar Base. Lunar Bases and Activities of the
21 Century Ed. W.W. Mendell.
64. Burke, J.D. Merits of a Lunar Polar Base Location.
Burke J.D. Lunar Bases and Activities of the 21 st
Century Ed. W.W. Mendell. LP I 1985.
65. Teller, Edward. Thoughts on a Lunar Base. Keynote
Address. Lunar Bases and Activities of the 21st
Century. LP I 1985.
66. Horz, Fredrich. Lava Tubes: Potential Shelters for
Habitats. Lunar Bases and Activities of the 21st
Century Ed. W.W. Mendell LP I 1985.
67. Brodsky, R.F. Earth Orbiter into Planetary Orbiter-
What's the Problem. Journal Of The Astronautical
Sciences, Vol. 32, #2, April - June 1984.
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
81
EBA
— — --
Extra Base Activity
ERV
Emergency Rescue
Vehicle
ETO Earth to Orbit
EVA
Extra Vehicular Activity
ELV Expendable Launch
Vehicle
F S S -1 Freedom Space Station 1
HLLV
Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle
SDLS
Shuttle Derived Launch
Vehicle
ALS Advanced Launch System
STS
Space Transportation
System
OTV Orbital Transfer Vehicle
mOTV Modular Orbital Transfer
Vehicle
LEO Low Earth Orbit
LPO Lunar Parking Orbit
TLI
Translunar Injection
T E I
Trans Earth Injection
82
LHB-l Lunar Habitation Base 1
LLO Low Lunar Orbit
LOi Lunar Orbit Insertion
LOR Lunar Orbit Rendezvous
LEOR Low Earth Orbit
Rendezvous
LEM Lunar Excursion M odule
ACS Attitude Control System
RCS Reaction Control System
RMS Remote M anipulator
System
AWP
Astronaut Work Platform
ATD Astronaut Translation
D evice
MT
M obile Transporter
MECO Main Engine Cut-Off
MPCV Multi Purpose
Construction Vehicle
MSS-1 Mars Space Station
PMC Permanent M anned
C apability
AC Assembly C om plete
IOC Initial Operational
C apability
8 3
LDLA
ECLSS
CELSS
SHADE
LRRD
3S
Lunar Descent and
Landing Assembly
Environmental Control
a nd Life Support System
C ontrolled Ecological Life
Support System
Solar Shading D evice
Lunar Rover Recharging
D e p o t
Solar Storm Shelter
RETURN TO THE MOON
MALEO.: MODULE-ASSEMBLY IN LOW EARTH ORBIT
. .. . 84
M ADHU THANGAVELU MBS THESIS SPRING 1989
ADVISERS G.G. SCHIERLE D. VERGUN R.F. BRODSKY
LUNAR BASE CONCEPTS EVALUATION
ERA CONCEPTS BY ASSEMBLY DDT&E IN H E R IT A B ILIT Y TIME TO DEPLOY EVOLUTION SAFETY COST REMARKS
t E SPACEFLIGHT
KEPLER,JULES VERNE
H.G. WELLS
BISHOP JOHN WILKINS
CYRANO DE BERGERAC
TSIOLKOVSKY
SZILARD,WILEY LEY
CHESLEY BONESTELL
VONBRAUN
FULLY ASSEMBLED
ON EARTH
QUICK SINGLE
LANDINGS
VOT INVESTIGATED
o .
a
-J
o
fi-
<
a
o c
S m
VON BRAUN
DILEONARDO
DINIKE & ZAHN
ARMYLUNAR
CONSTRUCTION AND
MAPPING PROGRAM
FULLY ASSEMBLED
ON EARTH
SOMELUNAR
ASSEMBLY MPCV
PROJECT
PLANNING
QUICK DEPLOYMENT
NOT
INVESTIGATED
IN DETAIL
NO RESCUE
VEHICLE
P O S T APOLLO
LESA
ALSS
MIMOSA
PROGRAM 1 1 1
JOHNSON
KRAFFT EHRICKE
EDWARD TELLER
PREASSEMBLED ON
EARTH. INTERNODAL
CONNECTIONS ON
LUNAR SURFACE
SNAP-8 NUCLEAR
POWER SUPPLY
PROJECT
PLANNING
MACROARCHITECTURE
•
QUICK TO 10 YEARS
FOR LUNAR COLONY
GOOD
INVESTIGATION
NO RESCUE
VEHICLE
RADIATION
PROTECTION
$ 65 MILLION
PER MAN DAY
s
a
H
05
><
W 3
z
o
p
■<
H
e t
o
a.
0 )
Z
<
.et
a
DUKE, MENDELL &
ROBERTS
HOFFMAN & NEIHOFF
BABB ,DA VIS .PHILLIP&
STUMP
KAPLICKY & NIXON
WEAVER & LAURSEN
BURKE, LAND,
ROWLEY & NEUDECKEf
LUNAR SURFACE
ASSEMBLY
MANNED EVA
ROBOTICS
TELEROBOTICS
STS BASED MISSION
SCHEDULES
MODULE LANDING/
HANDLING
TECHNIQUES
OTV/ LANDER STUDY
20 T PAYLOAD TO
LUNAR SURFACE
CISLUNAR
INFRASTRUCTURE
SPACE STATION
MODULES
HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH
VEHICLES
PROJECT
PLANNING 10 YEARS FOR LUNAR
COLONY
DETAILED
INVESTIGATION
SOLAR STORM
SHELTER
BURIED
STRUCTURES
EMERGENCY
RESCUE VEHICLE
u
<
c-
95
IN-SITU
CONSTRUCTION
SOLAR DYNAMICS
NUCLEAR POWER
SP-100
$ 5 MILLION
PER MAN DAY
CONCEPT §UTO¥ 2=A
M P E O G E E S S
MALEO CONCEPTS EVALUATION 8 5
ASSUMPTIONS
1. ASTRONAUT SAFETY PRIORITY ONE
2. M A X IM IZE ROBOTIC AC TIVITY
3. ENHANCE REAL T IM E TELEROBOTICS
4 . M IN IM IZ E MANNED EVA
5 . M A X IM IZE IN H E R ITA B ILITY
6 . M A X IM IZE COM M O NALITY
7. RAPID DEPLOYMENT
8. EVOLUTIONARY POTENTIAL
9. SPACE STATION FREEDOM ASSEMBLY
COMPLETE DECEMBER 1998
LUNAR BASE ASSEMBLY CONCEPTS
1. ASSEMBLE ON EARTH AND SOFT LAND ON
MOON
2. ASSEMBLE IN LOW EARTH ORBIT AND SOFT
LAND ON THE MOON
3. ASSEMBLE IN LUNAR ORBIT / LAGRANGE
POINTS AND SOFT LAND ON THE MOON
4. ASSEMBLE BASE ON THE LUNAR SURFACE
5. HYBRID ASSEMBLY
AMPLIFICATION OF CONCEPT 2
1. ASSEMBLE LUNAR BASE IN FREE SPACE AT
LOW EARTH ORBIT
2. ASSEMBLE LUNAR BASE IN THE V IC IN ITY OF
INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FREEDOM
3. ASSEMBLE LUNAR BASE ATTACHED TO THE
SPACE STATION,USING FREEDOM O NLY AS
SCAFFOLDING
4. ASSEMBLE LUNAR BASE AT THE SPACE
STATION,CONNECTED TO IT. SHARE
UTILITIES W HILE CONNECTED TOGETHER
PROGRAM
TASK
1. ESTABLISH BASE CAMP
2. EXTENDED HABITATIO N (3 MONTHS)
3. EXPLORATION
4 . EXPERIM ENTATIO N
COMPONENTS
1. SPACE STATION L IK E MODULES AND NODES
2 . SEPARATE SOLAR STORM SHELTER
3. M U LTI PURPOSE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE
4 . LUNAR ROVERS / EXPLORATION ENHANCING
EQUIPMENT
5. EMERGENCY RESCUE VEHICLE
OPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
CONCEPT §TTDT 35
M iPM PG lM g
JAPANESE EXPERIMENTAL MODULE (JEM)
U.S. HABITATION MODULE
U.S. LABORATORY MODULE
COLUMBUS MODULE (ESA)
SPACE STATION FREEDOM AT ASSEMBLY COMPLETE (AC) 8 7
MODULE ASSEMBLY USING REMOTE MANIPULATOR
SYSTEM (RMS) ______________ ____
' CONCEPT STUJIDY 2=A
U N PEQGIEEgg
MALEO ASSEMBLY AT FREEDOM 88
MODULE CONFIGURATION
TRUSS STRUCTURE
CONCEPT STUMf 2=A
MODULE INSERTION
QPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
MALEO MODULE CONFIGURATION STUDY g 9
SANITATION / HYGIENE NODE
HABITATION MODULE FOR CREW OF 4
IGH GAIN ANTENNA
TRUSS SUPERSTRUCTURE
LABORATORY MODULE
PRIMARY EVA NODE
MALEO PAYLOAD SUMMARY
1. HABITATION MODULE 15 - 17.5 MT
2. LABORATORY MODULE 15 -17.5 MT
3. POWER / LOGISTICS MODULE 15 - 17.5 MT
4. PRIMARY EVA NODE 5 - 7 MT
5. AIR REVITALIZATION NODE 5 - 7 MT
6. SANITATION / HYGIENE NODE 5 - 7 MT
7. TRUSS SUPERSTRUCTURE 6 MT
8. LANDING SHOCKS / AIRBAGS 4 MT
9. SOLAR ARRAYS / COMMS. 3 MT
10. LUNAR ROVER X 2
2 MT
11. MISCELLANEOUS 10 MT
TOTAL 100 M T
DEVITALIZATION NODE (EXPANSION)
ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM PALLET (ACSP)
POWER AND LOGISTICS MODULE
LANDING GEAR
CONCEPT § T H J H D Y 2=A
M PMDGEESS
RIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
MALEO AT ASSEMBLY COMPLETE 9 0
OPTION 1. PAYLOAD SUMMARY AT TLI
1. MALEO 100 MT
2. LANDER (LDLA) 100MT
3. mOTV X 6 600 MT
TO TAL 800 MT
MALEO TRANSLUNAR INJECTION 9 J
PHASE 2 PAYLOAD SUMMARY AT TLI
1. LDLA 100 MT
2. OTV X 3 300 MT
TO TAL 400 MT
PHASE X PAYLOAD SUMMARY AT T L I
1. MALEO
TO TAL 400 MT
PHASE I MALEO TRANSLUNAR INJECTION (TLI) PHASE 2 LDLA T LI TO LPO /n/PMM/PTB'TOni' tSTFTTTTTW
TO LUNAR PARKING ORBIT (LPO) C O N C E P T s T H J I D Y
M P M O G M E S S
'OPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
OPTION 2 MALEO TLI TWO PHASE TRANSFER 9 2
LUNAR DESCENT AND LANDING ASSEMBLY (LDLA)
PAYLOAD SUMMARY
PRIOR TO DE-ORBIT BURN
1. MALEO 100 MT
2. LDLA 100 MT
TO TAL 200 MT
(CONCEPT STUDY
M PE(Q )(G EESS
MALEO + LDLA LUNAR ORBIT RENDEZVOUS
93
)PYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
CONCEPT S T U JD Y .
m P M O C P E g S
MALEO TOUCHDOWN 9 4
TENSION RING
TIE ROD W ITH CLEVIS
TRUSS: TYPICAL JOINT / CONNECTIONS
TRUSS: MODULE SUSPENSION TENSION RING MECHANISM
COPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
CONCEPT STUPY 2=A
U N j PMOGEI Egg
MALEO DETAILS 95
BASIC MODES CISLUNAR DELTA V BUDGET MALEO MODES
DIRECT MODE
LOW EARTH ORBIT RENDEZVOUS (LEOR)
LUNAR ORBIT RENDEZVOUS (LOR)
EARTH TO MOON DELTA V BUDGET
I . EARTH TO LEO LAUNCH 9500
2. LEO TO LPO (TLI) 3100 m/s
3. LUNAR ORBIT INSERTION 900 m/s
4. DE-ORBIT/DESCENT/HOVER
TOUCHDOWN
OPTION 1. SINGLE PHASE TRANSFER LEOR
MALEO + LDLA LEOR....TLI.... LUNAR
DESCENT/TOUCHDOWN
iiiiP
OPTION 2. 2 PHASE TRANSFER LOR
MALEO TLI TO LPO
LDLA TLI TO SAME LPO
MALEO + LDLA LOR
LUNAR DESCENT/TOUCHDOWN
CONCEPT STURDY 2=A
M PMOGEESS
OPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
MALEO ORBITAL DYNAMICS 9 6
MALEO LAUNCH VEHICLES MALEO : LAUNCH MANIFEST
in the MALEO scenorio for hjnar case DuHd-up the components that need Flight Date Payload to L E O Activity gt’Freedem* - Payload in LE O
to be delivered to *Freedorn* in Low Earth Orbit are the following: (Cumulaltve)
S S -0 1 Feb 1999 habitation module ♦ Airlock dock wt Freedom using 25 M T
SPACE SHUTTLE LAUNCH MANIFEST R M S Retrofit by Freedom
crew, use space for
l. Habitation Moduie+Airtock 25 Mg enhanced Freeoom
2. LaboratoryModUle + Airlock 25 Mg
3. Pnver/Logistigs Mod ♦ Airlock 25 Mg S S -02 March laboratory module + Airlock dock w / Freedom. 50 M T
4. T ru ss Superstructure ♦ ACS + LG. 1 0 Mg Retrofit, Augment
S . EVA Equip + Comrrs ♦Solar panels 1 0 Mg Freedom lab. facility
6 . Lunar Rover X2 ♦ MscetaneouB 5 Mg SS -03 April power/log. module * Airlock dock w / Freedom. 75 M T
Retrofit. Complete
T O T A L ' ' 1 0 0 ‘M q MALEO configuration
SS -04 May superstructure/landing gear E VA assembly of T ru ss and IX M T
H LLV LAUNCH MANIFEST superstructure, landing
gear, ond attitude control
7. O TV XI IC O Mg propulsion pallet (ACSP)
8, 01V XI 1 0 0 Mg Solar panels / EVA Equipment
9. O TV XI IC O Mg Communication system s dock w/ Freedom. E VA
10. Fuelled Lander Assembly lOOMg
and robotic assembly
11. O TV XI 100Mg lunar rover X 2 Miscellaneous dock w/ Freedom. E V A
12. O TV XI IC O Mg ' and robotic assembly.
13. O TV XI 100Mg H ILV 1 June fUy fueled mOTVI dock w/ Freedom. Solar 200 M T
shodlng device< S H A D E )
T O T A L 700 Mg deployed to minimize
boil-off.
H L L V 2 July fuly fueled mOTV 2 dockw/ Freedom 300 M T
H L L V 3 August fully fueled mOTV3 dock w/ Freedom Cluster 400 M T
operations for m O TV .
Tele-robotics employed
M ALEO detached from
Freedom. mOTV cluster
docks w/ M A LEO .
August ‘ M A LE O ♦mOTV T U 400 M T
M ALEO Lunar orbit
insertion and m O TV
The space shuttle is used to deliver components of MALEO while the
jetttsson operation
Heavy Liff Lounch Vehicles (H LLV ) are used to deliver the fuelled Lunar Lunar orbital operations
Descent Lander Assembly (LDLA) as well as the modular Orbital Transfer
begin for M ALEO
Vehicles (mOTV). T h is technique is adopted because N ASA regulations at
this time do not dlow the space shuttle to carry cryogens in irs cargo bay.
The HLLV Is therefore the prime candidate for fuel and fuelled vehicle H L L V 4 Sept -99 fuly fuelled LD LA dock w! Freedom, Thrust IX M T
delivery. Fuelling and cryogen handling at the space station will definitely structure assembly.LDLA
enhance this part of the M ALEO strategy. opera tlonol.
H ILVS Oct 99 fuly fueBed mOTV 4 dock w/ Freedom.SHADE 2XMT
From the listing obove it is believed that four missions at the space shuttle deployed.
ond seven missions of the H LLV are required to deliver the necessary H LLV 6 Nov 99 tuU y fueBed mOTV 5 dock w/ Freedom 3XMT
components, propulsion system s ond MOTVs to ‘Freedom* for further H L LV 7 Dec 99 fuD y fuelled mOTV 6 dock w/ Freedom, Ouster 4XMT
assembly before eventual M ALEO ILL ops. mOTV operational
The turn around time between launches e about o month and determines LD LA docks with M O TV
the crttcol path of the M ALEO M ission Schedule. Ample lounch windows
exist from the ’Freedom* orbit to desireobie equatorial lunor orbits. They Dec 99 * LDLA* m O TV T U * 400 M T
occur in the order of every nine days or so. (2} Thus lounch windows may
not Interfere with the MALEO mission schedule either. The orbital-
assembly at MALEO as well as related space station activities ore of the L D LA lunar orbit Insertion,
order at days and hence do not conflict with the crttlcol path at the - m OTV jetfisson operation
mission schedule. Assuming o kareh capability turn around time tor both.
the HLLV as weB as the space muffle to be around one launch per month, - M ALEO * LD LA lunar orbit
these ocfMtles should toiie about seven to ten months. Once the LDLA • rendezvous
and the MALEO rendezvous, the entire MALEO + LDLA is descended to
the predetermined site. Shortly otter touchdown, upon establishing M ALEO + LD LA lunar
communication with m ission control on Earth and deploying solor arrays descent and touchdown
for power generation, the phase 1 lunar base is operational. ---
CONCEPT S T H J U D Y 2-A
M FlO G E E gg
* i
COPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
LAUNCH VEHICLES / LAUNCH MANIFEST 9 7
MODULE ASSEMBLY ON LUNAR SURFACE
DDT&E PRECURSORS LUNAR SURFACE
ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE
MULTIPURPOSE VEHICLE
EARTH BASED TELEROBOTICS
TELEROBOTICS _
INFRASTRUCTURE
SITE PREPARATION
MODULE ASSEMBLY IN LOW EARTH ORBIT
-SMALLER PAYLOADS
MORELAUNCHES
OTV DOCKING / FUELLING
NO ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS
SEVERAL TLIs
SEVERAL LOIs
NO ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS
LEM BASED RESCUE
VEHICLE IN LPO
MULTIPLE LANDINGS
MPCV LANDING
ROBOTIC SITE PREPARATION
MODULES LANDED SEPARATELY
CONSTRUCTION CREW ARRIVE
DEPLOY STORM SHELTER
DEPLOY EMERGENCY RESCUE
SYSTEM
MANNED EVA/ROBOTIC ASSEMBLY
OF LUNAR BASE
SAFE BASE OPERATIONAL AT END
OF ASSEMBLY
OPERATIONS BEGIN
MODULAR OTV
LANDER
TRUSS SUPERSTRUCTURE
COST OF MANNED OPERATIONS ARE
DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO
DISTANCE FROM EARTH
LARGERPAYLOADS
LESS LAUNCHES
MODULE ASSEMBLY AT
FREEDOM
SYSTEMS CHECKED OUT
SPARES/REPLACEMENTS
FROM FREEDOM/FLOWN
IN FROM EARTH.
PROXIMITY TO SPACE STATION
ENHANCES EARTH BASED
TELEROBOTICS
SAFER RADIATION ENVIRONMENT
RESCUE MORE FEASIBLE
FROM LEO
OPTION 1 SINGLE TLI
OPTION 2 TWO TLIs
ONE OR TWO LOIs
ORBITAL OPERATIONS
FINAL SITE SELECTION
OPTION 2 MALEO +LDLA LOR
MALEO TOUCHDOWN
DEPLOY POWER
ESTABUSH COMMUNICATION
WITH EARTH
DEPLOY STORM SHELTER
OPERATIONS BEGIN
CONCEPT S T H J U D Y 2-A
M PEOOEESS
COPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989
ACTIVITY COMPARISON 9 8
SOLAR SHADING DEVICE (SHADE)
M ULTI PURPOSE LUNAR OBSERVATION TOWER
LUNAR ROVER RECHARGING DEPOT (LRRD)
CONCEPT' §TO3 B)Y 2=A
M ULTI PURPOSE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE
(MPCV)
SOLAR POWER AUGMENTED LUNAR ROVER
(SALR)
COPYRIGHT MAD HU THANGAVELU 1989
IMAGES 99
THE BLOOM CONCEPT
“KB SM 6L £
'DEPLOYABLE
'RECOVERABLE'
THE EXO-SKELETAL CONCEPT
THE INFLATABLE CONCEPT
PNEUMATIC MEMBRANE CONCEPT
PARA-FOIL AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT
THE ROVER CONCEPT
PREFAB PIE CONCEPT
♦REUSABLE ADAPTABLE MULTI-ENVIRONMENTAL SHIPPABLE EXPLORATORY STRUCTURE
COPYRIGHT MADHU THANGAVELU 1989 . ______
THE RAMESES PROJECT*
1 0 0
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Investigation of sloshing water damper for earthquake mitigation
PDF
The response of high-rise structures to lateral ground movements
PDF
Investigation of seismic isolators as a mass damper for mixed-used buildings
PDF
Vibration reduction using prestress in wood floor framing
PDF
The Indian Himalayan building energy code as a step towards energy conservation
PDF
A computer teaching tool for passive cooling
PDF
Energy performance and daylighting illumination levels of tensile structures in an extreme climate
PDF
Computer aided value conscious design
PDF
Statistical analysis of the damage to residential buildings in the Northridge earthquake
PDF
Determine the optimum block type for use in Saudi Arabia
PDF
A proposal for the Indian National Lighting Code
PDF
From nescience to science and beyond: A critical investigation of 'building' in cyclone prone areas
PDF
Passive cooling methods for mid to high-rise buildings in the hot-humid climate of Douala, Cameroon, West Africa
PDF
A statical analysis and structural performance of commercial buildings in the Northridge earthquake
PDF
Behaviour of hipped roof dwellings in response to wind forces: A comparitive study of thatch against conventional roofs
PDF
Comparison of lateral performance: Residential light wood framing versus cold-formed steel framing
PDF
Computer aided design and analysis of anticlastic membranes and cable nets
PDF
Hebel design analysis program
PDF
Terrace housing: A conscious solution
PDF
A passive cooling system for residential buildings in the Eastern Province desert in Saudi Arabia
Asset Metadata
Creator
Thangavelu, Madhu
(author)
Core Title
Return to the moon: MALEO, Module Assemby in Low Earth Orbit: A strategy for lunar base build-up
Degree
Master of Building Science
Degree Program
Building Science
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
engineering, aerospace,engineering, architectural,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Schierle, Gotthilf Goetz (
committee chair
), Brodsky, Robert F. (
committee member
), Vergun, Dimitry K. (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c20-299113
Unique identifier
UC11259150
Identifier
EP41419.pdf (filename),usctheses-c20-299113 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
EP41419.pdf
Dmrecord
299113
Document Type
Thesis
Rights
Thangavelu, Madhu
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
engineering, aerospace
engineering, architectural